ESMA LIBRARY

The ESMA Library contains all ESMA documents. Please use the search and filter options to find specific documents.
96
DOCUMENTS

REFINE YOUR SEARCH

Sections

Type of document

Your filters
Prospectus X Board of Appeal X
Reset all filters

Pages

Date Ref. Title Section Type Download Info Summary Related Documents Translated versions
27/02/2019 BoA D 2019 01, 02, 03 and 04 Appeal by Svenska Handelsbanken AB, Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB, Swedbank A and Nordea Bank Abp against the European Securities and Markets Authority Decision PDF
829.04 KB
26/01/2016 BOA 2016 001 BoA 2016- 001 (Decision Kluge v EBA) Decision PDF
196.32 KB
08/10/2019 boa-2019-d-05_decision BOA decision creditreform_rating_ag_vs_eba Decision PDF
922.78 KB
30/11/2018 boa30.18 BoA Decision SEB appeal 30 November 2018 Decision PDF
416.77 KB
18/04/2018 ESMA71-99-969 Board of Appeal Appointments 2018 Press Release PDF
292.64 KB
24/06/2013 BoA 2013-008 Board of Appeal Decision , Decision PDF
242.72 KB
The joint Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities (EBA, ESMA and EIOPA) has published today its decision in an appeal brought by an Estonian company against a decision of the EBA. It concerned the question whether the suitability of the managers of a significant branch of a bank may be a matter within EU law, and not just national law. Allowing the appeal, the Board of Appeal interpreted Directive No. 2006/48/EC consistently with the EBA Guidelines on the assessment of the suitability of members of the management body and key function holders. It came to the conclusion that the “fit and proper” requirement is not restricted to the persons who direct the business of the credit institution. The matter therefore was within the EBA’s powers of investigation. Although the appellant criticised the way in which the EBA dealt with its complaint, the Board of Appeal made it clear that it did not accept that criticism. It considered that the EBA dealt with the complaint in an appropriate manner. The ground on which the appeal was allowed was one of interpretation of the applicable legal provisions. The case was remitted to the EBA to adopt the appropriate decision in accordance with the Board of Appeal’s findings. This is for information only. The decision consists of the signed Decision only. For any enquiries, please contact EIOPA’s Press Office: Anzhelika Mayer Tel.: +49 69 9511 1968
17/07/2014 2014/C1/02 Board of Appeal Decision , Decision PDF
368.94 KB
The Joint Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities (the European Banking Authority, the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority and the European Securities and Markets Authority) published its decision in an appeal brought by SV Capital OÜ, an Estonian company, against a decision of the EBA. This was the second appeal to be considered by the Board of Appeal in this matter between the same parties concerning the question whether the suitability of the managers of a significant branch of a bank raised a question of Union law. Following the Board of Appeal’s affirmative decision of 24 June 2013, the appellant requested the EBA to initiate an investigation against the Estonian and Finnish Financial Supervision Authorities because their alleged failure to take action in respect of individuals in the Estonian branch of Nordea Bank Finland PLC whom it was alleged were not fit and proper persons to be key function holders in the bank. The EBA decided that it would not initiate an investigation.  The Board of Appeal decided that the EBA had been right to raise the matter with the national supervisors, but that having done so, it was entitled to take no further action in the light of their responses. The Board accordingly dismissed the appellant’s appeal against the EBA’s decision.
13/01/2014 BoA 2013-014 Board of Appeal Decision Global Private Rating Company v. ESMA , Decision PDF
361.96 KB
Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities dismisses appeal made by a refused CRA-applicant against ESMA On 10 January 2014, the Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities handed down its decision on an appeal by the appellant, Global Private Rating Company “Standard Rating” Ltd, against the refusal by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) to register it as a credit rating agency. This is the first appeal against a decision by ESMA refusing an applicant registration as a credit rating agency. The Board of Appeal unanimously decided that the appeal should be dismissed, and that ESMA’s refusal decision should be confirmed. It stated that it accepted the appellant’s point that the registration of a credit rating agency by ESMA is a new process, and recognised that the procedures will to an extent take time fully to work out. Nevertheless, because of the responsibilities placed on credit rating agencies and their importance in the financial system generally, it considered that the onus must be on an applicant to satisfy ESMA that the relevant requirements are met. The application and its contents must be very clear, and it is not ESMA’s responsibility as regulator to remedy deficiencies.
29/03/2021 Decision BoA D 2021 02 Board of Appeal of the ESAs- decision on "A" vs ESMA Decision PDF
283 KB
03/05/2021 BoA D 2021 03 Board of Appeal of the ESAs- decision on City Insurance SA vs EIOPA Decision PDF
305.13 KB
04/11/2020 BoA D 2020 02 Board of Appeal of the ESAs- Decision on Howerton vs EIOPA Decision PDF
85.83 KB
12/10/2020 BoA D 2020 01 Board of Appeal of the ESAs- Decision on Howerton vs ESMA Decision PDF
616.54 KB
15/01/2021 BoA D 2021 01 Board of Appeal of the ESAs- Decision on Howeverton vs EBA Decision PDF
540.91 KB
13/03/2019 BoA PR 01 Board of Appeal PR- Shadow Ratings Appeals Press Release PDF
399.67 KB
26/01/2011 2011/35 Call for evidence- Request for technical advice on possible delegated acts concerning the Prospectus Directive (2003/71/EC) as amended by the Directive 2010/73/EU , Consultation Paper PDF
3.85 MB
10/06/2013 2013/619 Annex II Comparative table of responses from EEA States Report PDF
2.15 MB
10/06/2013 2013/619 Comparison of liability regimes in Member States in relation to the Prospectus Directive , Final Report PDF
596.91 KB
The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has published a report on the Comparison of liability regimes in Member States in relation to the Prospectus Directive.   This is the first report of its kind and provides a comparison of liability regimes covering the EEA – comprising the 27 EU Member States along with Iceland and Norway and is aimed at providing clarity for market participants about the different regimes in place. The report contains an overview of the different arrangements and frameworks in place in  EEA States to address administrative, criminal, civil and governmental liability, and provides clarity to market participants about the different regimes in place. The report was compiled in response to a European Commission request of January 2011 for assistance in identifying and monitoring the different regimes in EEA states.   The report does not cover how the regimes, or sanctions, are applied.    Report Comparison of liability regimes in Member States in relation to the Prospectus Directive Annex II Comparative table of responses from EEA States Annex III Individual responses from EEA States
13/01/2020 ESMA31-62-1409 Compliance table GLs on Risk factors Reference PDF
133.15 KB
26/09/2014 2014/1186 Consultation paper on draft RTS on prospectus related issues under the Omnibus II Directive , Consultation Paper PDF
670.42 KB
ESMA invites comments on all matters in this paper and in particular on the specific questions summarised in Annex I. Comments are most helpful if they:•    respond to the question stated;•    indicate the specific question to which they relate;•    contain a clear rationale; and•    describe any alternatives ESMA should consider.ESMA will consider all comments received by 19 December 2014. All contributions should be submitted online at www.esma.europa.eu under the heading ‘Your input - Consultations’. Publication of responses All contributions received will be published following the close of the consultation, unless you request otherwise. Please clearly and prominently indicate in your submission any part you do not wish to be publically disclosed. A standard confidentiality statement in an email message will not be treated as a request for non-disclosure. A confidential response may be requested from us in accordance with ESMA’s rules on access to documents. We may consult you if we receive such a request. Any decision we make not to disclose the response is reviewable by ESMA’s Board of Appeal and the European Ombudsman.Data protection                      Information on data protection can be found at www.esma.europa.eu under the heading ‘Legal Notice’.Who should read this paper This document will be of interest to all stakeholders. It would primarily be of interest to investors, issuers, offerors or persons asking for admission to trading on a regulated market, as well as to any market participant who is affected by Directive 2003/71/EC of 4 November 2003 (the Prospectus Directive) as amended by Directive 2010/73/EU and Directive 2010/78/EU and its Regulation (Commission Regulation (EC) No 809/2004) and Delegated Regulations (Commission Delegated Regulation (EC) No 486/2012, No 862/2012, No 759/2013 and No 1392/2014.
15/12/2017 ESMA31-62-802 Consultation Paper on draft RTS under the new Prospectus Regulation Consultation Paper PDF
1.45 MB

Pages