ESMA LIBRARY

The ESMA Library contains all ESMA documents. Please use the search and filter options to find specific documents.
78
DOCUMENTS

REFINE YOUR SEARCH

Sections

Type of document

Your filters
Securities Financing Transactions X Prospectus X Joint Committee X Guidelines and Technical standards X Q&A X Annual Report X Final Report X Decision X
Reset all filters

Pages

Date Ref. Title Section Type Download Info Summary Related Documents Translated versions
28/03/2011 2011/22 Report- ESMA Data on Prospectuses Approved and Passported- July 2010 to December 2010 , Final Report PDF
134.79 KB
06/07/2012 2012/387 Final report Guidelines on certain aspects of the MiFID suitability requirements , Final Report PDF
444.15 KB
25/09/2012 2012/602 ESMA Data on Prospectuses Approved and Passported- January 2011 to December 2011 , Final Report PDF
573.49 KB
25/09/2012 2012/603 ESMA Data on Prospectuses Approved and Passported- January 2012 to June 2012 , Final Report PDF
431.12 KB
NOTE: This Report is an amended version of the Report published on 25 September 2012. The previously published Report was amended on 15 May 2013 following the discovery of factual errors in the statis-tical information in Section III.2.   Title ESMA Data on Prospectuses Approved and Passported - January 2012 to June 2012
18/12/2013 2013/1943 ESMA Data on Prospectuses Approved and Passported—January 2013 to June 2013 , Final Report PDF
338.17 KB
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
14/06/2013 2013/741 ESMA Data on Prospectuses Approved and Passported—January 2012 to December 2012 , Final Report PDF
457.11 KB
The report compiles statistical data regarding the number of prospectuses approved and passported by National Competent Authorities in the period from January 2012 to December 2012 (with a quarterly disclosure).
23/10/2014 2014/1276 ESMA Data on Prospectuses Approved and Passported – January 2013 to December 2013 , Final Report PDF
285.12 KB
The report compiles statistical data regarding the number of prospectuses approved and passported by National Competent Authorities in the period from January 2013 to December 2013 (with a quarterly disclosure).
23/10/2014 2014/1277 ESMA Data on Prospectuses Approved and Passported – January 2014 to June 2014 , Final Report PDF
211.96 KB
The report compiles statistical data regarding the number of prospectuses approved and passported by National Competent Authorities in the period from January 2014 to June 2014 (with a quarterly disclosure).
01/04/2014 2014/342 Languages accepted for the purpose of the scrutiny of the Prospectus and requirements of translation of the Summary- March 2014 , Final Report PDF
194.98 KB
The document provides an overview of the languages that each national competent authority accepts when acting as home or host competent authority, as the case may be, for the purpose of the scrutiny of the prospectus. In addition the document outlines national requirements in relation to translation of summaries.
02/12/2014 2014/BOA/05 Decision by the ESA BoA concerning Investor Protection Europe sprl , Decision PDF
229.85 KB
The Joint Board of Appeal of the ESAs decides on the inadmissibility of an appeal brought by IPE sprl, a company based in Brussels, against a decision by ESMAThe Joint Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities published today its decision in an appeal brought by Investor Protection Europe (IPE) sprl, a company based in Brussels, against a decision of the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) of 10 June 2014 not to initiate an investigation under Article 17 of the ESMA Regulation regarding an alleged breach of Union law by the Commission de Surveillance du Secteur Financier of Luxembourg.  The Board of Appeal unanimously decided that the appeal was inadmissible, and in the light of that decision, did not consider the substance of IPE’s complaint.
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.
23/07/2015 2015/1136 EEA prospectus activity in 2014 , Final Report PDF
578.07 KB
30/06/2016 2016/1055 Peer Review Report on Prospectus Approval Process , Final Report PDF
1.23 MB
30/09/2016 2016/1412 Final Report on MAR Guidelines on commodity derivatives , , Final Report PDF
566.52 KB

Article 7(5) of MAR provides that the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) shall issue guidelines to establish a non-exhaustive indicative list of information which is reasonably expected or is required to be disclosed in accordance with legal or regulatory provisions in Union or national law, market rules, contract, practice or custom, on the relevant commodity derivatives markets or spot markets as referred to in Article 7(1)(b) of MAR. This final report follows the Consultation Paper (CP) issued on March 2016.

Contents

Section 2 contains information on the background and mandate, while Section 3 sets out ESMA’s feedback to the CP responses in relation to the scope of the guidelines, the financial instruments and products covered by the examples of information relating directly and indirectly to commodity derivatives and information directly relating to a spot market contract. It also indicates whether and where ESMA has changed the guidelines following the consultation.

Annex I lists questions raised in the CP. Annex 2 provides the legislative mandate on the basis of which ESMA is issuing these guidelines. Annex 3 sets out ESMA’s view on the costs and benefits associated with these guidelines. Annex 4 contains the text of the guidelines.

Next steps

The guidelines in Annex 4 will be translated into the official languages of the European Union and published on the ESMA’s website. Within 2 months of the issuance of the translations, each national competent authority will have to confirm whether it complies or intends to comply with those guidelines. In the event that a national competent authority does not comply or does not intend to comply, it will have to inform ESMA, stating its reasons. ESMA will publish the fact that a national competent authority does not comply or does not intend to comply with those guidelines.

 

 

10/10/2016 2016/1451 Final Report- Guidelines on transaction reporting, order record keeping and clock synchronisation under MiFID II , Final Report PDF
388.3 KB
26/05/2016 2016/725 Draft RTS on indirect clearing arrangements under EMIR and MiFIR , , Final Report PDF
740.71 KB
19/12/2016 2016/JCESA QA Questions and Answers on Big Data Q&A PDF
333.65 KB
09/04/2019 2019 19 Joint Committee Annual Report 2018 Annual Report PDF
198.17 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

Pages