ESMA LIBRARY

The ESMA Library contains all ESMA documents. Please use the search and filter options to find specific documents.
919
DOCUMENTS

REFINE YOUR SEARCH

Sections

Type of document

Your filters
MiFID - Investor Protection X MiFID - Secondary Markets X Short Selling X Joint Committee X Warnings and publications for investors X
Reset all filters
Date Ref. Title Section Type Download Info Summary Related Documents Translated versions
19/11/2019 ESMA71-319-154 Banking and the MiFID II review , , Speech PDF
135.75 KB
25/01/2013 2012/682 HU Befektetési útmutató Reference PDF
795.26 KB
Befektetési útmutató
25/01/2013 2012/682 NL Beleggersgids Reference PDF
689.11 KB
Beleggersgids
30/04/2019 ESMA70-155-3655 Belgian Power Physical Base position limit opinion Opinion PDF
261.43 KB
01/10/2013 2013/606 NL Beloningsbeleid en beloningspraktijken (MiFID) , Guidelines & Recommendations PDF
319.71 KB
22/12/2014 JC/GL/2014/01 LT Bendrosiosgairės dėl priežiūros praktikos, kuri susijusi su finansinių konglomeratų priežiūros veiklos koordinavimo tvarkos suderinimu, konvergencijos , Guidelines & Recommendations PDF
227.31 KB
25/02/2015 2015/494 Best Execution under MiFID , Final Report PDF
761.62 KB
The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has conducted a peer review on how national regulators (national competent authorities or NCAs) supervise and enforce the MiFID provisions relating to investment firms’ obligation to provide best execution, or obtain the best possible result, for their clients when executing their orders. ESMA found that the level of implementation of best execution provisions, as well as the level of convergence of supervisory practices by NCAs, is relatively low. In order to address this situation a number of improvements were identified, including: • prioritisation of best execution as a key conduct of business supervisory issue; • the allocation of sufficient resources to best execution supervision; and • a more proactive supervisory approach to monitoring compliance with best execution requirements, both desk-based and onsite inspections. The review was conducted on the basis of information provided by 29 NCAs and complemented by on-site visits to the NCAs of France, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, Poland and Spain.
22/12/2014 JC/GL/2014/01/NL Bijlage I: Model voor het in kaart brengen (mapping) van het financiële conglomeraat (JC 2014 07 , Guidelines & Recommendations XLSX
67.95 KB
22/12/2014 JC/GL/2014/01/DA Bilag I: Skema til brug for kortlægningen af det finansielle konglomerat (JC 2014 070 Bilag) , Guidelines & Recommendations XLS
93.5 KB
22/12/2014 JC/GL/2014/01/SV Bilaga I: Mall för kartläggningsprocessen för det finansiella konglomeratet (JC 2014 070 , Guidelines & Recommendations XLSX
62.26 KB
27/03/2019 ESMA35-43-1862 BO Renewal Decision 3 Notice Reference PDF
83.42 KB
bgendadeelenenhrhuitenlvmtplroslsvnlptfiskes
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.
03/10/2018 ESMA70-154-803 BoS Decision Notice AT Guidelines Withdrawal , Guidelines & Recommendations PDF
512.94 KB
19/12/2018 ESMA35-43-1328 Brexit Statement- information to clients , Statement PDF
212.95 KB
28/03/2019 ESMA90-1-83 Brexit Update March 2019 , , , , , Statement PDF
121.13 KB
13/02/2019 ESMA71-319-91 Brexit – the regulatory challenges , , , , , Speech PDF
175.3 KB

Steven Maijoor keynote at the European Financial Forum in Dublin

16/01/2017 ESMA00-6-265 Briefing note on MiFID II technical data reporting requirements Reference PDF
146.74 KB
17/07/2019 ESMA35-43-1905 Call for evidence Impact of the inducements and costs and charges disclosure requirements under MiFID II Consultation Paper PDF
479.41 KB