(1) A recognition order [in respect of a recognised investment exchange or in respect of a recognised clearing house which is not a recognised central counterparty] may be revoked by an order made by [the appropriate regulator] at the request, or with the consent, of the recognised body concerned.
[(1A) A central counterparty recognition order may be revoked by an order made by the Bank of England in accordance with Article 20 of the EMIR regulation.]
[(1B) A CSD recognition order may be revoked by an order made by the Bank of England in accordance with Article 20 of the CSD regulation.]
(2) If it appears to [the appropriate regulator] that a recognised body [which is not a recognised central counterparty
**Trials are provided to all LexisPSL and LexisLibrary content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial.
Existing user? Sign-in
Take a free trial
Direct discriminationIP COMPLETION DAY: 11pm (GMT) on 31 December 2020 marks the end of the Brexit transition/implementation period entered into following the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. At this point in time (referred to in UK law as ‘IP completion day’), key transitional arrangements come to an
Motor claims in the Portal—a practical guide (Stage 1)The Pre-Action Protocol for Low Value Personal Injury Claims in Road Traffic Accidents—30 April 2013 onwardsSTOP PRESS: A new RTA small claims protocol for whiplash claims comes into effect for accidents occurring on or after 31 May 2021. The
Costs and the ‘without prejudice’ ruleCosts determination and the ‘without prejudice’ ruleAn issue for practitioners is whether correspondence marked ‘without prejudice’ can be used against a party when the court comes to determine the issue of costs. The Court of Appeal in Walker v Wilsher (1889)
Strict liabilityStrict liabilityWhen an offence does not require proof of a mental element it is an offence of strict liability. There are some common law offences of strict liability (eg public nuisance, outraging public decency and contempt) most though are statutory, arising often under
0330 161 1234
To view the latest version of this document and millions of others like it, sign-in to LexisLibrary or register for a free trial.