Related provisions for APER 4.6.3

21 - 40 of 49 items.
Results filter

Search Term(s)

Filter by Modules

Filter by Documents

Filter by Keywords

Effective Period

Similar To

To access the FCA Handbook Archive choose a date between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2004 (From field only).

EG 14.1.1RP
1The FCA will consider all the relevant circumstances of each case and may take a number of factors into account when it decides whether to use these powers. The following list is not exhaustive; not all these factors may be relevant in a particular case and there may be other factors that are relevant. (1) The seriousness of the breach or likely breach by an authorised fund manager or depositary of a requirement imposed by or under the Act. The following
ICOBS 2.5.3GRP
(1) Where it is compatible with the nature of the obligation imposed by a particular rule and with the Principles, in particular Principles 1 (Integrity), 2 (Skill, care and diligence) and 3 (Management and control), firms may rely on third parties in order to comply with the rules in this sourcebook.(2) For example, where a rule requires a firm to take reasonable steps to achieve an outcome, it will generally be reasonable for a firm to rely on information provided to it in writing
SYSC 4.8.16GRP
In accordance with SYSC 4.8.15G(4), when SYSC 4.8.10R(1) refers to a person having overall responsibility for a function, it means a person who has: (1) ultimate responsibility (under the governing body of the branch) for managing or supervising that function; and(2) primary and direct responsibility for:(a) briefing and reporting about that function to the branch’sgoverning body or equivalent; and(b) putting matters for decision about that function to the branch’sgoverning body
PRIN 3.2.3RRP
Principles 3, 4 and (in so far as it relates to disclosing to the appropriate regulator) 11 (and this chapter) also:(1) apply with respect to the carrying on of unregulated activities (for Principle 3 this is only in a prudential context); and(2) take into account any activity of other members of a group of which the firm is a member.
CONC 1.1.4GRP
The Principles for Businesses (PRIN) apply as a whole to firms with respect to credit-related regulated activities and ancillary activities in relation to credit-related regulated activities (see PRIN 3). In carrying on their activities, firms should pay particular attention to their obligations under: (1) Principle 1 (a firm must conduct its business with integrity);(2) Principle 2 (a firm must conduct its business with due skill, care and diligence);(3) Principle 3 (a firm must
DISP 1.3.3RRP
In respect of complaints that do not relate to MiFID business, a respondent must put in place appropriate management controls and take reasonable steps to ensure that in handling complaints it identifies and remedies any recurring or systemic problems, for example, by: 1(1) analysing the causes of individual complaints so as to identify root causes common to types of complaint;(2) considering whether such root causes may also affect other processes or products, including those
This chapter amplifies threshold condition 2D1 (Appropriate1 resources) by providing that a firm must meet, on a continuing basis, a basic solvency requirement and a minimum capital resources requirement. This chapter also amplifies Principles 3 and 4 which require a firm to take reasonable care to organise and control its affairs responsibly and effectively with adequate risk management systems and to maintain adequate financial resources by setting out capital resources for
SUP App 3.6.15GRP
The FCA and PRA consider6 that, in order to comply with Principle 3:Management and control (see PRIN 2.1.1 R), a firm should have appropriate procedures to monitor the nature of the services provided to its customers. Where a UK firm has non-resident customers but has not notified the EEA State in which the customers are resident that it wishes to exercise its freedom to provide services, the FCA and PRA6 would expect the firm's systems to include appropriate controls. Such controls
PRIN 3.1.1RRP
PRIN applies to every firm, except that:(1) for an incoming EEA firm or an incoming Treaty firm, the Principles apply only in so far as responsibility for the matter in question is not reserved by an EU4 instrument to the firm's Home State regulator;4(2) for an incoming EEA firm which is a CRDcredit institution8 without a top-up permission, Principle 4 does not apply;12812(3) for an incoming EEA firm which has permission only for cross border services and which does not carry
EG 8.3.4RP
1The FCA will consider the full circumstances of each case when it decides whether an urgent variation of Part 4A permission or an imposition of a requirement is appropriate. The following is a non-exhaustive list of factors the FCA may consider. (1) The extent of any loss, or risk of loss, or other adverse effect on consumers. The more serious the loss or potential loss or other adverse effect, the more likely it is that the FCA’s urgent exercise of own-initiative powers will
MIPRU 2.3.5GRP
Firms are reminded that Principle 3 requires firms to take reasonable care to organise and control their affairs responsibly and effectively. Principle 3 is amplified by the rule which requires firms to take reasonable care to establish and maintain such systems and controls as are appropriate to its business (SYSC 3.1.1 R and SYSC 4.1.1 R).5 A firm's systems and controls should enable it to satisfy itself of the suitability of anyone who acts for it (SYSC 3.2.13 G and SYSC 5.1.2
SYSC 4.4.6GRP

Frequently asked questions about allocation of functions in SYSC 4.4.5 R

Question

Answer

1

Does an individual to whom a function is allocated under SYSC 4.4.5 R need to be an approved person or a certification employee8?

An individual to whom a function is allocated under SYSC 4.4.5 R will be performing the apportionment and oversight function (CF 8, see SUP 10A.7.1 R17) and an application must be made under section 59 of the Act for approval of the individual before the function is performed. There are exceptions from this in SUP 10A.117 (Approved persons - Application).

The apportionment and oversight function does not apply to a relevant authorised person. However, a person performing the role in SYSC 4.4.5R will fall into the certification regime in SYSC 5.2 (Certification Regime), unless the person performing it is an approved person. A person performing the role in SYSC 4.4.5R may be an approved person because of another role that they perform (such as being an executive director).8

1717

2

If the allocation is to more than one individual, can they perform the functions, or aspects of the functions, separately?

If the functions are allocated to joint chief executives under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 2, they are expected to act jointly. If the functions are allocated to an individual under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 2, in addition to individuals under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 3, the former may normally be expected to perform a leading role in relation to the functions that reflects his position. Otherwise, yes.

3

What is meant by "appropriately allocate" in this context?

The allocation of functions should be compatible with delivering compliance with Principle 3, SYSC 4.4.3 R and SYSC 4.1.1 R. The appropriate regulator considers that allocation to one or two individuals is likely to be appropriate for most firms.

4

If a committee of management governs a firm or group, can the functions be allocated to every member of that committee?

Yes, as long as the allocation remains appropriate (see Question 3). If the firm also has an individual as chief executive, then the functions must be allocated to that individual as well under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 2 (see Question 7).

5

Does the definition of chief executive include the possessor of equivalent responsibilities with another title, such as a managing director or managing partner?

Yes.

6

Is it possible for a firm to have more than one individual as its chief executive?

Although unusual, some firms may wish the responsibility of a chief executive to be held jointly by more than one individual. In that case, each of them will be a chief executive and the functions must be allocated to all of them under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 2 (see also Questions 2 and 7).

7

If a firm has an individual as chief executive, must the functions be allocated to that individual?

Normally, yes, under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 2.

But if the firm is a body corporate and a member of a group, the functions may, instead of being allocated to the firm'schief executive, be allocated to a director or senior manager from the group responsible for the overall management of the group or of a relevant group division, so long as this is appropriate (see Question 3). Such individuals may nevertheless require approval under section 59 (see Question 1).

If the firm chooses to allocate the functions to a director or senior manager responsible for the overall management of a relevant group division, the FSA would expect that individual to be of a seniority equivalent to or greater than a chief executive of the firm for the allocation to be appropriate.

See also Question 14.

8

If a firm has a chief executive, can the functions be allocated to other individuals in addition to the chief executive?

Yes. SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 3, permits a firm to allocate the functions, additionally, to the firm's (or where applicable the group's) directors and senior managers as long as this is appropriate (see Question 3).

9

What if a firm does not have a chief executive?

Normally, the functions must be allocated to one or more individuals selected from the firm's (or where applicable the group's) directors and senior managers under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 3.

But if the firm:

(1) is a body corporate and a member of a group; and

(2) the group has a director or senior manager responsible for the overall management of the group or of a relevant group division;

then the functions must be allocated to that individual (together, optionally, with individuals from column 3 if appropriate) under SYSC 4.4.5 R, column 2.

10

What do you mean by "group division within which some or all of the firm's regulated activities fall"?

A "division" in this context should be interpreted by reference to geographical operations, product lines or any other method by which the group's business is divided.

If the firm's regulated activities fall within more than one division and the firm does not wish to allocate the functions to its chief executive, the allocation must, under SYSC 4.4.5 R, be to:

(1) a director or senior manager responsible for the overall management of the group; or (2) a director or senior manager responsible for the overall management of one of those divisions;

together, optionally, with individuals from column 3 if appropriate. (See also Questions 7 and 9.)

11

How does the requirement to allocate the functions in SYSC 4.4.5 R apply to an overseas firm which is not an incoming EEA firm, incoming Treaty firm or UCITS qualifier?

The firm must appropriately allocate those functions to one or more individuals, in accordance with SYSC 4.4.5 R, but:

(1) The responsibilities that must be apportioned and the systems and controls that must be overseen are those relating to activities carried on from a UK establishment with certain exceptions (see

SYSC 1 Annex 1.1.8R). Note that SYSC 1 Annex 1.1.10R does not extend the territorial scope of SYSC 4.4 for an overseas firm.

(2) The chief executive of an overseas firm is the person responsible for the conduct of the firm's business within the United Kingdom (see the definition of "chief executive"). This might, for example, be the manager of the firm'sUK establishment, or it might be the chief executive of the firm as a whole, if he has that responsibility.

The apportionment and oversight function applies to such a firm, unless it falls within a particular exception from the approved persons regime (see Question 1).

12

How does the requirement to allocate the functions in SYSC 4.4.5 R apply to an incoming EEA firm or incoming Treaty firm?

SYSC 1 Annex 1.1.1R(2) and SYSC 1 Annex 1.1.8R restrict the application of SYSC 4.4.5 R for such a firm. Accordingly:

(1) Such a firm is not required to allocate the function of dealing with apportionment in SYSC 4.4.5R (1).

(2) Such a firm is required to allocate the function of oversight in SYSC 4.4.5R (2). However, the systems and controls that must be overseen are those relating to matters which the appropriate regulator, as Host State regulator, is entitled to regulate (there is guidance on this in SUP 13A Annex 2). Those are primarily, but not exclusively, the systems and controls relating to the conduct of the firm's activities carried on from its UK branch.

(3) Such a firm need not allocate the function of oversight to its chief executive; it must allocate it to one or more directors and senior managers of the firm or the firm'sgroup under SYSC 4.4.5 R, row (2).

(4) An incoming EEA firm which has provision only for cross border services is not required to allocate either function if it does not carry on regulated activities in the United Kingdom; for example if they fall within the overseas persons exclusions in article 72 of the Regulated Activities Order.

See also Questions 1 and 15.

13

What about a firm that is a partnership or a limited liability partnership?

The appropriate regulator envisages that most if not all partners or members will be either directors or senior managers, but this will depend on the constitution of the partnership (particularly in the case of a limited partnership) or limited liability partnership. A partnership or limited liability partnership may also have a chief executive (see Question 5). A limited liability partnership is a body corporate and, if a member of a group, will fall within SYSC 4.4.5 R, row (1) or (2).

14

What if generally accepted principles of good corporate governance recommend that the chief executive should not be involved in an aspect of corporate governance?

The Note to SYSC 4.4.5 R provides that the chief executive or other executive director or senior manager need not be involved in such circumstances. For example, the UK Corporate Governance Code5 recommends that the board of a listed company should establish an audit committee of independent,9 non-executive directors to be responsible (among other things) for overseeing the effectiveness9 of the audit process and the objectivity and independence of the external auditor9. That aspect of the oversight function may therefore be allocated to the members of such a committee without involving the chief executive. Such individuals may require approval under section 59 in relation to that function (see Question 1).

5

15

What about incoming electronic commerce activities carried on from an establishment in another EEA State with or for a person in the United Kingdom?

SYSC does not apply to an incoming ECA provider acting as such.

DISP App 3.4.1GRP
DISP 1.3.3 R requires the firm to put in place appropriate management controls and take reasonable steps to ensure that in handling complaints it identifies and remedies any recurring or systemic problems. If a firm receives complaints about its sales of payment protection contracts it should analyse the root causes of those complaints including, but not limited to, the consideration of:(1) the concerns raised by complainants (both at the time of the sale and subsequently);(2)
SYSC 3.2.4GRP
(1) The guidance relevant to delegation within the firm is also relevant to external delegation ('outsourcing'). A firm cannot contract out its regulatory obligations. So, for example, under Principle 3 a firm should take reasonable care to supervise the discharge of outsourced functions by its contractor.(2) A firm should take steps to obtain sufficient information from its contractor to enable it to assess the impact of outsourcing on its systems and controls.
EG 19.14.3RP
1The Money Laundering Regulations add to the range of options available to the FCA for dealing with anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist financing 2 failures. These options include2:• to prosecute a relevant person, including but not limited to an 2authorised firm, an 2Annex I financial institution or an auction platform, as well as any responsible officer2;2• to fine or censure a relevant person, including but not limited to an2 authorised firm, an2 Annex I financial institution
APER 2.1A.3RRP

1Statements of Principle issued under section 64A(1)(a) of the Act

Statement of Principle 1

An approved person must act with integrity in carrying out his accountable functions.

Statement of Principle 2

An approved person must act with due skill, care and diligence in carrying out his accountable functions.

Statement of Principle 3

An approved person must observe proper standards of market conduct in carrying out his accountable functions.

Statement of Principle 4

An approved person must deal with the FCA, the PRA and other regulators in an open and cooperative way and must disclose appropriately any information of which the FCA or the PRA would reasonably expect notice.

Statement of Principle 5

An approved person performing an accountable higher management function1 must take reasonable steps to ensure that the business of the firm for which they are 1responsible in their 1accountable function is organised so that it can be controlled effectively.

Statement of Principle 6

An approved person performing an accountable higher management function1 must exercise due skill, care and diligence in managing the business of the firm for which they are1 responsible in their 1accountable function.

Statement of Principle 7

An approved person performing an accountable higher management function1 must take reasonable steps to ensure that the business of the firm for which they are 1responsible in their 1accountable function complies with the relevant requirements and standards of the regulatory system.

SYSC 19B.1.10RRP
An AIFM must ensure that employees engaged in control functions are compensated according to the achievement of the objectives linked to their functions, independent of the performance of the business areas they control.[Note: paragraph 1(e) of Annex II of AIFMD]
COCON 3.1.7GRP
UK domestic firms listed on the London Stock Exchange are subject to the UK Corporate Governance Code, whose internal control provisions are explained in the publication entitled ‘Internal Control: Revised Guidance for Directors on the Combined Code (October 2005)’ issued by the Financial Reporting Council. Therefore, firms in this category will be subject to that code, as well as to the rules in COCON. In forming an opinion as to whether a senior conduct rules staff member has
SYSC 19E.2.10RRP
A management company must ensure that employees engaged in control functions are compensated according to the achievement of the objectives linked to their functions, independent of the performance of the business areas that are within their remit.[Note: article 14b(1)(e) of the UCITS Directive]