ESMA LIBRARY

The ESMA Library contains all ESMA documents. Please use the search and filter options to find specific documents.
24
DOCUMENTS

REFINE YOUR SEARCH

Sections

Type of document

Your filters
MiFID - Investor Protection X Audit X Corporate Finance X Warnings and publications for investors X Corporate Governance X Securitisation X Sustainable finance X Market Integrity X Joint Committee X Technical Advice X CESR Document X Decision X
Reset all filters
Date Ref. Title Section Type Download Info Summary Related Documents Translated versions
24/10/2012 JC/CP/2012/01 Feedback statement ESA feedback statement on the Joint CP on Financial Conglomerates CESR Document PDF
82.95 KB
10/04/2019 JC 2019 26 Joint ESA advice on the need for legislative improvements relating to ICT risk management requirements , Technical Advice PDF
1.34 MB
10/04/2019 JC 2019 25 Joint ESA advice on the costs and benefits of developing a coherent cyber resilience testing framework for significant market participants and infrastructures , Technical Advice PDF
785.49 KB
16/03/2020 ESMA70-155-9546 ESMA decision on thresholds for reporting net short positions , , Decision PDF
236.65 KB
26/03/2020 ESMA70-155-9546 ESMA Decision Article 28 SSR_reporting threshold , Decision PDF
236.57 KB
bgcsdadeelesetfifrhrhuitltlvmtnlplptroskslsv
17/12/2020 ESMA70 -155-11608 Decision renewal art. 28 SSR reporting threshold- December 2020 , , Decision PDF
246.27 KB
bgcsdadeelesetfifrhrhuitltlvmtnlplptroskslsv
17/09/2020 ESMA70-155-11072 ESMA Decision- renewal Article 28 SSR reporting threshold- September 2020 , , Decision PDF
396.47 KB
11/06/2020 ESMA70-155-10189 ESMA Decision- renewal Article 28 SSR reporting threshold , , Decision PDF
333.33 KB
29/03/2021 ESMA35-43-2430 Final Report ESMA’s Technical Advice to the Commi Technical Advice on the application of administrative and criminal sanctions under MiFID II/MiFIR Technical Advice PDF
337.33 KB
04/02/2020 ESMA35-43-2134 ESMA’s Technical Advice to the Commission on the effects of product intervention measures Technical Advice PDF
425.6 KB
01/04/2020 ESMA35-43-2126 Technical Advice on the impact of the inducements and costs and charges disclosure requirements under MiFID II Technical Advice PDF
464.68 KB
31/01/2019 ESMA35-43-1562 CFD Renewal Decision (2) Notice Decision PDF
103.92 KB
encsdadeelesetfifrhrhuitltlvmtnlplplptroskslsv
21/12/2018 ESMA35-43-1533 ESMA35-43-1533 Binary Options Renewal Decision Notice Decision PDF
83.04 KB
enenenenfrenelenethrhuitltlvmtnlplptroskslsv
31/10/2018 ESMA35-43-1397 CFD Renewal Decision Notice Decision PDF
101.55 KB
enenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenen
13/11/2018 ESMA33-128-505 Final Technical Advice Securitisation Repositories Fees Technical Advice PDF
570.74 KB
14/08/2015 BOA/2015/001 Decision of the Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities given under Article 60 of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 and the Board of Appeal’s Rules of Procedure (BOA 2012 002) , Decision PDF
147.78 KB
30/04/2018 BoA 2018-01 Decision in an appeal by A v ESMA , Decision PDF
392.62 KB
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.
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.