Search results for

What reforms must PM Narendra Modi prioritise to kick-start the investment cycle

A former CFIUS representative explains the realities of filing with the body. Applicants should treat the process like a confession, not a deposition

Dealmaking is bouncing back, driven by sustainable and strategic transactions. But the new risks inherent in large-cap deals could rain on Europe's M&A parade

Kyriacos Kourtelos In 2009, the EC proposed a directive on Alternative Investment Fund Managers (AIFMs). The proposed directive aimed to ensure a high level of investor protection by setting out a common framework for the authorisation and supervision of AIFMs in the EU. Further, it aimed to provide robust and harmonised regulatory standards for all AIFMs within its scope and to enhance the transparency of AIFMs' activities and improve disclosure to stakeholders. In 2010, a political agreement was reached by the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers on Directive 2011/61/EU on Alternative Investment Fund Managers (AIFMD), which amended directives 2003/41/EC and 2009/65/EC and regulations EC 1060/2009 and EU 1095/2010. As the AIFMD adopts a phased approach to the implementation, it affects European Economic Area (EEA) and non-EEA fund managers differently. Nonetheless, becoming fully authorised under the AIFMD may allow certain fund managers to undertake management and marketing activities throughout the whole of the EU. Member states were required to transpose the AIFMD into national law by July 22 2013. Cyprus was the second member state to harmonise its legislation with the AIFMD, with the enactment of the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Law of 2013 (Law 56(I)/2013 – the Law), which was published in the Official Gazette of the Republic on July 5 2013. The Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC) was appointed as the relevant supervisory authority under the law. The AIFMD and the law are complemented by three EC regulations that have direct effect, namely:

Carlos Fradique-Mendez Ana María Rodríguez As the IMF has pointed out, a country's position on anti-money laundering and terrorism financing may facilitate its integration into the global financial system and strengthen governance and fiscal administration. In line with this, Colombia has made recent developments regarding anti-money laundering and terrorism financing. In a new regulation for companies in the real sector of the economy, the Colombian Superintendence of Companies has set out certain obligations that must be observed by all legal entities that, as of December 31 2013, had an income exceeding 160,000 monthly minimum legal salaries (approximately $49 million). Before the issuance of Regulation 304, regulations against money laundering and terrorism financing (ML/TF) were focused on some specific industries of the economy (such as the financial sector, football clubs, courier and mailing entities, gamble and games entities, gold exporting and importing entities, securities transportation, and custom agencies). Apart from the financial sector, other industries had not been heavily regulated, meaning that existing regulations were not comprehensive and neglected to address important matters. This resulted in the Colombian authorities being urged to update the standards and introduce new rules to act against ML/TF.

The news that London has finally issued its maiden sukuk has everyone excited that Islamic finance could become a viable option for corporates in the western world. However, alongside the jubilation comes another round of inevitable discussions about competition between finance centres vying to gain the biggest slice of the lucrative shariah market.

Thomas Sando One of the changes to the Norwegian Competition Act (the Act) that entered into force on January 1 2014 was the amendments to the leniency scheme available for cartel participants considering blowing the whistle to the Norwegian Competition Authority (the NCA). Under the previous scheme, the conditions for obtaining leniency were hidden in the Leniency Regulation. From January 1, the conditions are included in the new sections 30 and 31 of the Act, dealing with complete and partial leniency respectively. Besides the relocation of the conditions for obtaining leniency, the amended scheme introduces a marker system in line with the system in the EU. This is an improvement, as it will be possible for leniency applicants to initially bring only limited information, yet receive leniency rights from the time of the initial application.

Tomasz Konopka Borys D Sawicki Ms X, an accountant at company A, domiciled in country B, receives a phone call. Someone on the other side of the line explains that he is calling her in connection with a new project run by company A in which her assistance will be required. Shortly after, Ms X receives an e-mail from a top level manager of company A (whom she has never met personally), Mr Z, referring to that call and repeating the message. Mr Z explains the relevance of the project to company A and stresses the importance of Ms X's involvement for its success. He also requests Ms X to keep the matter secret and to work on the assignment solely with him. Ms X feels honoured. Not long after the call, Ms X receives her first task in the project: she has to wire €450,000 ($613,000) from company A's bank account to an account of a company (unknown to her) in Country C. The following days bring several similar requests; Ms X wires the monies and Mr Z praises her assistance and encourages her to continue, as the project is about to be successfully completed. But before the successful completion arrives, Ms X's direct superior finally notices the transfers from the bank account of company A and demands explanations. A few hours later, it is clear that Mr Z (the real one) has never contacted Ms X nor instructed her to make any money transfer. At which time, however, the monies are already in a bank account in country C. The story is neither unrealistic nor exceptional – frauds similar to the one depicted above are occurring more and more often. There are several reasons for this, the shift towards electronic means of communication in lieu of direct (face to face) contacts being one of them. Loosened relations between staff and managers and properly employed social engineering generate opportunities for those willing to take advantage of the dangerous mix created by modern technology and people's gullibility. While there is no way (and no need) to stop technological progress, companies assisted by experts, including lawyers experienced in similar matters, may undertake various precautionary steps to mitigate the threat.

A new act on private flat renting (Act) came into force on May 1 2014. It is intended to improve the position of landlords and motivate investors to build private rental flats, and is a special piece of legislation compared to Civil Code. It means that rights and obligations of the landlord and tenant related to private flat renting will be governed by provisions of the Act. The Civil Code will be used only in cases not covered by the Act. The Act does not apply automatically; it is subject to the tenant's acknowledgement that the rental agreement is entered into in accordance with the Act. Hence, parties may still decide to use the legal regime under the Civil Code.

The lighter side of the past month in the world of financial law