Search results (1699 cards)

Advanced search

After the close of financial markets , the Charmain of JP Morgan, Jamie Dimon, announced on 10 may 2012, the loss of 2 billion dollars on hedging activities. The announcement was carried out by a conference call, the Chairman saying the past that this is the result of errors of assessment and in the future that losses may increase. Commentators have pointed out that it made less legitimate criticism that this Chairman has always made on the regulation of banking of the Dodd-Frank Act and the ban of trading for own account, the press considered moreover that the manager has more shown by such a result the need of constraint to exercise in the future on banks. But should we have to confuse ad hoc case and the general rule to adopt? Is relevance of a critic and special case in which is described that is one was critical can be remain relevant?

The financial crisis and the banking technology shows that the "trading" is specific. This is why the Basel Committee estimates that it appropriate to regulate banks trading activity in a specific way. But it is difficult to characterize the activity of "trading" and actual banking activity itself. Trading is limited to negotiation; it justifies less equity as security, since it does not present credit risk. But this characterization even is questionable. This is why a consultation opened on May, 3 by the Basel Committee, and the qualification, and the classification of operations, and the measures of prevention of risks to be taken by specific prudential measures. Responses can be made until September 7, 2012.

Hrvatskoj agenciji za nadzor financijskih usluga - Bogovićeva 1a, 10 000 Zagreb 10 000 Zagreb Tel. : + 00 385 01/6173 200 info@hanfa.hr

Just released the book of Sofia Ranchordiàs, Constitutional Sunsets and Experimental Legislation. This  topic is particularly important in regulatory systems where this method is used very often.

As soon as Legislation is case management, it becomes a matter of time, good timing, and efficiency.

Because the figure of the Law has changed its terms should change. The most appropriate law then appears the "experimental law", the "trial law." This ephemeral legislation as regulatory bodies promote, can claim to be part of the future only if it has "successful". Operators must be good students if they want to conserve the Law!footnote-14.

Thus, the law is only a draft and it is its success that allows the standard access to the status that was natural: the Act that applies to the future.

These precarious laws that certains authors and regulatory bodies present as the right model, challenge the constitutional principles, the Constitution itself being the supreme law governing the future.

This book shows the extent to which notions of efficiency, testing, flexibility, can attack the very idea of Parliament Law  and Constitution. It is true that in regulatory systems everything becomes simple regulations, including laws but it is also true that constitutional courts are restive to admit "experimental laws".

Cet ouvrage montre jusqu'à quel point les notions d'efficacité, de test, de flexibilité, peuvent attaquer l'idée même de Loi et de Constitution. Il est vrai qu'en Régulation, tout ne deviendrait que réglementation, y compris la loi et il est vrai que les cours constitutionnelles sont rétives à admettre les "lois expérimentales".

Read the consultation draft

Bessy, Christian, Delpeuch, Thierry, Pélisse, Jérôme (dir.), Droit et régulations des activités économiques : perspectives sociologiques et institutionnalistes (English translation: Law and regulations of the economic activities: sociological and institutionalist prospects). Maison des sciences de l'homme- Réseau européen Droit et Société, coll. "Droit et Sociétés - Recherches et Travaux", t. 24, LGDJ, 2011, 320 p.

Online gambling operators must receive the approval of The Autorité française de régulation des jeux en ligne (ARJEL -The French Online Gaming Regulatory Authority) before exercising. It is a priori control that is to say, ex ante, specific of the regulation mechanism. But litigation were born about updates of licensed software, the update requiring a new legal approval. Regulatory authority has just notify to the European Commission on April 15, 2012 the new system that it implements: the authorised operator may modify the software originally certified and will merely notify the Regulatory authority. If it considers it necessary, the Regulatory authority may require that the operator requests a new registration. The system becomes a "semi-ex-post" supervision .

The French Rail Regulator entrusts a public undertaking, RFF ("Réseau Ferré de France"), the management of the railway infrastructure. It must therefore enter into contracts with the railway undertakings to have rail transportation. European laws provide that these contracts must follow on the one hand, the specific legal provisions, and on the other hand the "network statement ". In addition, framework agreements determine the distribution of the allocation of capacity of the infrastructure between transport undertakings, schedules and prices. The regulator must give a reasoned opinion on these agreements. The notice is only optional, binding neither the State nor the parties. RFF ("Réseau Ferré de France") has developed a project of framework agreement and transmitted it to the autorité française de régulation des activités ferroviaires (ARAF) – (French Rail Regulator). It has chosen to open on 17 April a public consultation, with on its website the project of framework agreement, allowing any stakeholders to express themselves on the duration, pricing, transparency and confidentiality, and also the contractual balance of such an agreement. The consultation will be closed on 4 June and the autorité française de régulation des activités ferroviaires (ARAF) – (French Rail Regulator) will then deliver its opinion.