ESMA LIBRARY

The ESMA Library contains all ESMA documents. Please use the search and filter options to find specific documents.
19
DOCUMENTS

REFINE YOUR SEARCH

Sections

Type of document

Your filters
Vacancy X SMSG Advice X Q&A X Decision X Corporate Governance X Procurement X IAS Regulation X Press Releases X Market Abuse X Joint Committee X
Reset all filters
Date Ref. Title Section Type Download Info Summary Related Documents Translated versions
07/01/2022 ESMA22-106-3809 SMSG response to ESAs on their joint Call for evidence on the European Commission mandate regarding the PRIIPs Regulation Fund Management, Joint Committee, Securities and Markets Stakeholder Group SMSG Advice PDF
325.26 KB
07/03/2017 ESMA22-106-140 SMSG advice on the Joint ESMA EBA guidelines on the Assessment of the Suitability Joint Committee, Securities and Markets Stakeholder Group SMSG Advice PDF
150.61 KB

SMSG advice on the Joint ESMA EBA guidelines on the Assessment of the Suitability of Members of the Management Body and Key Function Holders
21/01/2020 ESMA22-106-2077 SMSG Advice on Joint Consultation Paper on PRIIPs KID Joint Committee, Securities and Markets Stakeholder Group SMSG Advice PDF
426.62 KB
13/05/2022 JC 2022 26 SFDR queries forwarded to the Commission Joint Committee, Sustainable finance Q&A PDF
132.33 KB
19/12/2016 2016/JCESA QA Questions and Answers on Big Data Joint Committee Q&A PDF
333.65 KB
06/08/2021 ESMA70-145-111 Q&A on the Market Abuse Regulation Market Abuse, Market Integrity Q&A PDF
475.69 KB

The purpose of this document is to promote common supervisory approaches and practices in the application of MAR and its implementing measures. It does this by providing responses to questions posed by the general public and competent authorities in relation to the practical application of the MAR framework

The content of this document is aimed at competent authorities to ensure that in their supervisory activities and their actions are converging along the lines of the responses adopted by ESMA and at helping issuers, investors and other market participants by providing clarity on the content of the market abuse rules, rather than creating an extra layer of requirements.
11/04/2019 ESMA31-62-780 Q&A on Prospectus Related Topics Brexit, Corporate Disclosure, Corporate Finance, Corporate Governance, Corporate Information, Prospectus, Supervisory convergence Q&A PDF
957.9 KB
01/04/2016 2016/419 Q&A Market Abuse Directive Market Abuse Q&A PDF
175.08 KB
17/12/2021 Joint Committee JC 2017 Q&A on the PRIIPs Key Information Document Joint Committee Q&A PDF
755.23 KB
01/10/2019 ESMA63-313-528 Financial Regulation of the European Securities and Markets Authority Management Board, Procurement Decision PDF
445.94 KB
30/11/2021 SFDR EC Q&A CORRECTION EC Q&A on sustainability-related disclosures- correction Joint Committee, Sustainable finance Q&A PDF
87.19 KB
26/07/2021 SFDR EC Q&A EC Q&A on sustainability-related disclosures Joint Committee, Sustainable finance Q&A PDF
601.99 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) Joint Committee, Board of Appeal Decision PDF
147.78 KB
30/04/2018 BoA 2018-01 Decision in an appeal by A v ESMA Board of Appeal, Joint Committee Decision PDF
392.62 KB
02/12/2014 2014/BOA/05 Decision by the ESA BoA concerning Investor Protection Europe sprl Joint Committee, Board of Appeal 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.
21/07/2016 2016/1131 BoS Decision on Fitch Ratings Limited 21 July 2016 Credit Rating Agencies, Press Releases Decision PDF
108.21 KB
13/01/2014 BoA 2013-014 Board of Appeal Decision Global Private Rating Company v. ESMA Joint Committee, Board of Appeal 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 Joint Committee, Board of Appeal 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 Joint Committee, Board of Appeal 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.