Related provisions for PERG 6.1.1
441 - 460 of 640 items.
A person who is treated under MAR 2.5.1R (1) as acting or engaging in conduct in conformity with the price stabilising rules is also to be treated to an equivalent extent as so acting or engaging for the purposes of:(1) [deleted]2(2) Part XIV (Disciplinary measures); and (3) Part XXV (Injunctions and Restitution) of the Act.
(1) This sourcebook contains quotations from the Act, the Recognition Requirements Regulations, the RAP regulations,5 the Companies Act 19895and, where necessary, words have been added to, or substituted for, the text of these provisions to facilitate understanding.32(2) The additions and substitutions are enclosed in square brackets ([ ]). The omission of words within a quotation is indicated by three dots (...).(3) Any words in these quotations which have the same meaning as
As part of the SLRP, the appropriate regulator will assess the appropriateness of the liquidity risk tolerance adopted by an ILAS BIPRU firm to ensure that this risk tolerance is consistent with maintenance by the firm of adequate liquidity resources for the purpose of the overall liquidity adequacy rule. The appropriate regulator will expect a firm to provide it with an adequately reasoned explanation for the level of liquidity risk which that firm'sgoverning body has decided
Regulation 44 of the RCB Regulations (Warning notices and decision
notices) applies Part XXVI of the Act (Notices)
in respect of notices that we give under the RCB
Regulations. This means that the provisions of section 393
of the Act (Third party rights)
and section 394 of the Act (Access
to Authority material) apply to penalty procedures under the RCB Regulations and that, if the matter
is not referred to the Tribunal,
then upon taking the action to which a decision
notice relates,
(1) The dual-regulated firms Remuneration Code applies to:(a) a building society;(b) a UK bank2;(c) a UK designated investment firm;(d) an overseas firm that;(i) is not an EEAfirm;(ii) has its head office outside the EEA; and(iii) would be a firm in (a), (b) or (c) if it had been a UK domestic firm, had carried on all of its business in the United Kingdom and had obtained whatever authorisations for doing so as are required under the Act.(2) For a firm which falls under (1)(a),
1Under Part III RIPA the FCA is able to require a person who holds “protected” electronic information (that is, information which is encrypted) to put that information into an intelligible form and, where the person has a key to the encrypted information, to require the person to disclose the key so that the data may be put into an intelligible form. The FCA may impose such a requirement where it is necessary for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime or where it is necessary
2When the FCA1 decides whether to make a prohibition order against an approved person and/or withdraw their1 approval, the FCA will consider all the relevant circumstances of the case. These may include, but are not limited to those set out below. (1) The matters set out in section 61(2) of the Act.
(2) Whether the individual is fit and proper to perform functions in relation to regulated activities. The criteria for assessing the fitness and propriety of
(1) An adviser4 (as referred to in IPRU(INV) 3-60(4)R), is only required to submit the annual report and accounts if:(a) it is a partnership or body corporate; and(b) the annual report and accounts were audited as a result of a statutory provision other than under the Act.(2) A service company is only required to submit the annual report and accounts if the reports and accounts were audited as a result of a statutory provision other than under the Act.
(1) Although CASS does not apply directly to a firm's appointed representatives, a firm will always be responsible for the acts and omissions of its appointed representatives in carrying on business for which the firm has accepted responsibility (section 39(3) of the Act). In determining whether a firm has complied with any provision of CASS, anything done or omitted by a firm's1appointed representative (when acting as such) will be treated as having been done or omitted by the
A notice of intention3 (other than one to establish a branch or provide services in another EEA state under the auction regulation)7 may include activities within the scope of the relevant Single Market Directive which are not regulated activities (paragraphs 19(3) and 20(2) of Part III of Schedule 3 to the Act), although in the case of a MiFID investment firm a notice of intention may only include ancillary services which are to be carried on with one or more investment services
(1) 4Unless required to do so under the regulatory system, a firm must ensure that neither it nor anyone acting on its behalf claims, in a public statement or to a client, expressly or by implication, that its affairs, or any aspect of them, have the approval or endorsement of the FCA6 or another competent authority.(1A) 7Paragraph (1) does not apply to a firm to the extent that it is incompatible with the United Kingdom’s obligations under article 44(8) of the MiFID Org Regulation.
The Act prohibits any person from carrying on, or purporting to carry on, regulated activities in the United Kingdom unless that person is an authorised person or an exempt person. If an overseas investment exchange wishes to undertake regulated activities in the United Kingdom, it will need to:2(1) obtain a Part 4A permission2 from the FCA2; 22(2) (in the case of an EEA firm or a Treaty firm) qualify for authorisation under Schedule 3 (EEA Passport Rights) or Schedule 4 (Treaty
1Under section 312C of the Act, if a UK RIE wishes to make arrangements in an EEA State other than the UK to facilitate access to or use of a regulated market,2multilateral trading facility, organised trading facility4 or auction platform2 operated by it, it must give the FCA3written notice of its intention to do so. The notice must:3(1) describe the arrangements; and(2) identify the EEA State in which the UK RIE intends to make them.[Note:MiFID RTS 3 and MiFID ITS 4, Annex
1The broad test the FCA will apply when it decides whether to seek an injunction is whether the application would be the most effective way to deal with the FCA's concerns. In deciding whether an application for an injunction is appropriate in a given case, the FCA will consider all relevant circumstances and may take into account a wide range of factors. The following list of factors is not exhaustive; not all the factors will be relevant in a particular case and there may be