Financial services regulation essentials

This subtopic provides an overview of EU financial services regulation. It is aimed at lawyers who need a high level overview of the legal framework and key issues, and who are not specialised in Financial Services. For in-depth practical guidance on Financial Services, see the Financial Services practice area (subject to subscription).

Introductory material

•
Practice Note Introduction to European financial services law and financial services coverage is an informal brief introduction to EU financial services law, describing the regulatory regime through brief guidance and by means of multiple links to relevant material, mainly hosted on the EU website and on the websites of other international institutions and of the UK government. There are also multiple relevant links to commentary and analysis provided by the EU Law module
•
Practice Note An introduction to regulatory arbitrage in financial services defines and describes regulatory arbitrage. It focuses on the problem in the financial services sector in the EU. It gives examples of regulatory arbitrage and discusses how the regulatory regime responds
•
Practice Note Remuneration issues in EU financial services and insurance—essentials discusses the EU remuneration

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest EU Law News

Commission opens EU DMA breach investigation into Google search practices

The European Commission has formally launched proceedings to assess whether Google applies fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory conditions of access to publishers’ websites on Google Search, as required under the EU Digital Markets Act (EU DMA). The investigation focuses on Google’s site reputation abuse policy, which, according to the Commission’s monitoring, appears to demote news media and other publishers’ websites and content in Google Search results where those sites include content from commercial partners. The Commission is examining whether Alphabet’s demotions may breach Articles 6(5) and 6(12) of the DMA, which require transparent, fair and non-discriminatory conditions for search ranking. The policy appears to affect publishers’ ability to monetise their websites through legitimate business partnerships with third-party content providers. The initiation of proceedings does not prejudge the outcome of the investigation. The Commission aims to conclude its inquiry within 12 months of the opening of proceedings on 13 November 2025. If non-compliance is established, penalties may reach up to 10% of Alphabet’s total worldwide turnover, rising to 20% for repeated infringement, with potential additional remedies including divestment of business operations in cases of systemic non-compliance.

EU Law weekly highlights—13 November 2025

This week's edition of EU Law weekly highlights includes analysis that the Council of the EU reimposed a comprehensive set of restrictive measures against Iran. In addition this week, the European Commission announced that 21 European airlines agreed to modify their practices regarding environmental claims, opened an antitrust investigation to assess whether Deutsche Börse and Nasdaq breached EU competition rules, the European Data Protection Board adopted an opinion on the Commission’s draft adequacy decision on the level of protection of personal data in Brazil, launched a public consultation seeking input on which ready-to-use templates on the EU General Data Protection Regulation compliance, the Commission welcomed the judgment of the Court of Justice on Adequate Minimum Wages Directive, the European Parliament’s Committee on Employment and Social Affairs has urged the Commission to propose legislation regulating the use of algorithmic management, the Commission published its 2025 State of the Energy Union and Climate Progress Reports, launched a call for participants in a Multi-Stakeholder Forum on Internet Standards Deployment, launched work on a code of practice for the marking and labelling of AI-generated content, the 30th Conference of the Parties (COP30) of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change officially began, the Council of the EU reached an agreement to amend the European Climate Law, the Council and Parliament reached a provisional agreement on the CountEmissionsEU proposal and on the simplification of the Common Agricultural Policy.

COP30 round-up—12 November 2025 (Health, Jobs, Education, Culture, Justice and human rights, Information integrity, Workers and Global Ethical Stocktake)

On 12 November 2025, the third day of the 30th Conference of the Parties (COP30) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), several key initiatives were announced. The Global Initiative for Information Integrity on Climate Change launched the Declaration on Information Integrity on Climate Change, while the Independent High-Level Expert Group on Climate Finance (IHLEG) published its fourth report outlining a pathway to mobilise US$1.3trn annually in climate finance by 2035. In addition, the Global Initiative on Jobs & Skills for the New Economy was launched, and the UN Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) unveiled a Plan to Accelerate Solutions alongside the Belém Declaration on Sustainable Public Procurement.

UPC flexes long-arm jurisdiction again by granting permanent injunction covering non-UPC and non-EU states

EU Law analysis: Dr. Robyn Trigg and Benjamin Thomas of Osborne Clarke consider the Unified Patent Court’s (UPC) latest demonstration of its expanding jurisdictional reach, as it grants a permanent injunction extending beyond UPC-contracting member states to cover non-UPC EU countries and even non-EU territories. In HL Display v Black Sheep Retail Products, the Hague Local Division assumed jurisdiction over a European patent validated in UPC states (eg Netherlands, France, Germany), non-UPC EU states (eg Ireland, Poland), and non-UPC non-EU states (eg UK, Liechtenstein), finding both validity and infringement while issuing relief across all jurisdictions in which the patent is in force. This decision highlights the UPC’s growing appeal as a forum for cross-border patent enforcement and marks an important shift in how global patent holders may approach European IP litigation.