We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 13

International regulatory update 7 - 11 January 2013

  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • -
  • European Union, France, Global, India, Poland, Singapore, United Kingdom, USA
  • -
  • January 14 2013

EMIR: Extension of scrutiny period for Commission Delegated Regulations Basel III: Basel Committee releases revised version of Liquidity Coverage

Claims against banks: the facts win again

  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • March 14 2011

Facts usually determine the outcome of litigation

Update: new information and disclosure requirements for banks in relation to spread ladder swaps - May 2011

  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • -
  • Germany
  • -
  • May 19 2011

Over the last years, German courts had to decide in a number of cases on disclosure and information requirements for a bank entering into structured swap transactions with German municipalities as well as corporate and private customers

International regulatory update 29 October - 2 November 2012

  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • -
  • Global
  • -
  • November 5 2012

The Cyprus EU Council Presidency has published a new compromise text for the proposed regulation on insider dealing and market manipulation, which updates the existing framework provided by the Market Abuse Directive

SFAT awards costs against the SFC

  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • -
  • Hong Kong
  • -
  • March 29 2011

In a recent decision by the Securities and Futures Appeal Tribunal (SFAT) in respect of an application for costs, SFAT No. 2 of 2010, the SFAT has determined that the applicant should be compensated by an award of costs in his favour against the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC), where the SFAT found, on an application for a review of the penalty (not findings of misconduct) that the SFC's proposed penalty was manifestly excessive, and the application was therefore successful

Claims against banks: another factual triumph

  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • March 24 2011

The banking industry's run of success in defeating misselling claims brought by customers in the English courts continued in Bank Leumi (UK) plc v Wachner 2011 EWHC 656 (Comm

New information and disclosure requirements for banks in relation to spread ladder swaps - March 2011

  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • -
  • Germany
  • -
  • March 28 2011

Germany's highest court in civil matters, the Bundesgerichtshof ("BGH") decided on information and disclosure requirements for banks when selling a specific type of structured products, spread ladder swaps, to their customers

Securities and Futures Appeal Tribunal - landmark court of appeal decision

  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • -
  • Hong Kong
  • -
  • June 16 2011

In a landmark decision, the Court of Appeal unanimously overturned the practice that the Securities and Futures Appeal Tribunal (the SFAT) has adopted since 2003 in only proceeding on the basis that it has a limited role in reviewing Securities and Futures Commission (the SFC) decisions which are appealed to the SFAT

International regulatory update 19-23 September 2011

  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • -
  • European Union, France, Germany, Japan, Libya, Netherlands, Poland, United Kingdom
  • -
  • September 28 2011

The Comisión Nacional del Mercado de Valores (National Securities Market Commission) (CNMV) has published an updated set of FAQs in relation to its temporary measure on net short positions

Singapore decision offers guidance for exempted entities on the operation of certain exemptions in the Securities and Futures (Licensing and Conduct of Business) Regulations

  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • -
  • Singapore
  • -
  • July 12 2011

The Singapore High Court has held that it has the inherent jurisdiction to reconsider issues of illegality pertaining to a contract even though the arbitral tribunal may have already determined that the contract in question was not illegal