fundamental legislative differences

Partial knowledge of the rules and a certain lack of discipline in applying them are factors in this context (e.g. few authorities provide regular feedback on the progress made in their investigative and enforcement activities as established) but there are also more fundamental divergences that stand in the way of a more efficient use of the CPC mechanisms. In particular for the alerts, where there no common approach among authorities about how and when to use them, as well as the requests for enforcement measures, for which authorities have (very) different standards of legal analysis and evidence.

Partial knowledge of the rules and a certain lack of discipline in applying them are factors in this context (e.g. few authorities provide regular feedback on the progress made in their investigative and enforcement activities as established) but there are also more fundamental divergences that stand in the way of a more efficient use of the CPC mechanisms. In particular for the alerts, where there no common approach among authorities about how and when to use them, as well as the requests for enforcement measures, for which authorities have (very) different standards of legal analysis and evidence.

9. Proposes that the forthcoming revision of Directive 93/22/EEC should provide for Member States to grant a right of access for investment firms from other Member States to central counterparty, clearing and settlement systems in their territory and that those systems should be subject to the transparent and objective criteria applicable to local participants; proposes that an information statement be drawn up identifying the fundamental differences between the Member States" laws affecting clearing and settlement systems, in order to guide market participants; considers that in the long-term the creation of a securities code could be ...[+++] envisaged; takes the view, however, that this should be a long-term goal, since it is not feasible in the short term due to the necessity of dealing with differences concerning the legal framework for sensitive issues such as company law, property rights and insolvency law; proposes that a working party of securities experts should be set up rapidly to study in detail the questions raised by harmonisation of securities legislation in the EU and to propose solutions to the abovementioned differences;

9. Proposes that the forthcoming revision of Directive 93/22/EEC should provide for Member States to grant the right of access for investment firms from other Member States to central counterparty, clearing and settlement systems in their territory and that these systems should be subject to the harmonised transparent and objective criteria applicable to local participants; proposes that an information statement be drawn up identifying the fundamental differences between the Member States’ laws affecting clearing and settlement systems, in order to guide market participants; considers that in the long-term the creation of a securities ...[+++]code could be envisaged; takes the view, however, that this should be a long-term policy ambition, since this is not a feasible short-term goal due to the necessity of dealing with differences with regard to the legal framework for sensitive issues such as company law, property rights and insolvency law; proposes that a working party of securities-law experts should be set up rapidly to study in detail the questions raised by harmonisation of securities law within the EU and to propose solutions to the differences recorded;