Scope of this Practice Note This Practice Note describes the Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA’s) competition law powers under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA 2000) and related investigative powers and penalties for breaches. In addition, it considers the FCA’s and the Prudential Regulation Authority’s (PRA’s) secondary international competitiveness and growth objective brought in by the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023 (FSMA 2023). It also outlines the FCA’s market studies, calls for input and other competition reviews. Overview of the FCA’s competition law powers The FCA has a statutory objective under the FSMA 2000 to promote effective competition in the interests of consumers in the markets for regulated financial services and services provided by a recognised investment exchange. Moreover, it also has a duty to promote effective competition in the interests of consumers when advancing its other two statutory objectives: consumer protection and market integrity. The FCA can investigate markets where competition may not be working well for consumers, and intervene where appropriate. The FCA can only use these powers

Financial services analysis: Sara Cody, Regulatory Counsel at Linklaters, analyses the Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) new Enforcement Guide (ENFG), considering what has changed in the FCA’s approach to publicising investigations and outlining other significant updates.

Financial Services analysis: The Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) policy statement PS22/5 sets out the changes to the FCA’s Handbook and Enforcement Guide in respect of the FCA’s power to cancel or vary the statutory permissions of FCA-authorised firms where these are not being used and the firm has not responded to notices warning of risk of action in this regard. These changes follow on from the FCA’s consultation papers CP21/16 (June 2021) and CP21/28 (September 2021). The power and associated procedure is set out in Schedule 6A to the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA 2000) (as amended by the Financial Services Act 2021 (FSA 2021)). Written by Rowena Wisniewska Sethi, barrister and Akash Gohil, second six pupil at 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square.

ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note is not being maintained. Most multinational companies today engage third parties, which can provide them with valuable resources for conducting business throughout the world. Third parties also can provide companies with a high risk of corruption that can lead to potential violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). However, with proper diligence, contractual provisions, training, and oversight, companies can maintain control over FCPA risk and reap the benefits of third parties’ contribution to their businesses. The FCPA prohibits corrupt payments made through any third party 'knowing' that some or all of the payment will be paid to a foreign government official. Third parties can include agents, distributors, consultants, contractors, and subcontractors. They can also include service-providers, suppliers, and other non-intermediary third parties. The FCPA does not require actual knowledge of a third party’s acts; rather, willful blindness is sufficient to impute knowledge. That means companies cannot simply turn a blind eye or otherwise ignore signs of possible bribery

This Practice Note sets out guidance in relation to the allocation and transfer of proceedings generally in the Family Court, which replaced the previous three tiers of court structure dealing with family proceedings in England and Wales (ie the family proceedings court, the County Court and (partially) the High Court) on 22 April 2014. It considers the background to and key features of the Family Court, in addition to the allocation and transfer of proceedings. Background to the Family Court Following the publication of the Family Justice Review, in February 2012, the government accepted recommendations for a 'single Family Court'. The Family Court replaced the previous three tiers of court structure dealing with family proceedings, ie the family proceedings court, the County Court and (partially) the High Court—however, the High Court retains exclusive jurisdiction over a limited number of cases. The Family Court came into effect on 22 April 2014 and is a national court for England and Wales. Significant changes were also made in relation to the allocation and transfer of proceedings. Terminology

Following the introduction of the Family Court on 22 April 2014, significant changes were made to what type of case may be allocated to the different levels of the judiciary in the Family Court and what remedies may be granted at the different judicial levels. For a general introduction to the allocation and transfer of proceedings, see Practice Note: The Family Court—allocation and transfer of proceedings. Specific provisions apply in relation to transfers to the High Court. Cases that need to be heard by a High Court judge will be heard in the Family Court by a High Court judge. Cases will not be transferred to the High Court on the grounds of complexity. No transfer of a case will be permitted unless ordered by the President of the Family Division or a High Court judge. The President’s guidance dated 28 February 2018 (subsequently revised by Sir Andrew McFarlane from 24 May 2021) highlights that a transfer of a case to the High Court to be heard by a judge of that court is not the same as the

Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, 25.10(2) is specific in providing that written questions to an expert must be put within ten days of the date on which the report was served, unless the court directs otherwise. In practice, some experts will answer questions put (shortly) outside this time window. However, the other party would then be entitled to object to the expert’s

PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: The High Court held that there was no bar to a claimant making an application under section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980) to disapply the time limits in a Fatal Accidents Act 1976 (FAA 1976) claim where the primary limitation period expires to prior the death of the deceased person. Master Cook disagreed with how the legislation had been interpreted in some commentaries and clarified how the relevant sections of LA 1980 applied when read together. The court also held, in exercising the discretion under LA 1980, s 33, that a 5½ year delay caused by solicitors, which included previous proceedings being issued and then not pursued, was not something that could be visited upon the claimant. Even though there may have a remedy in professional negligence, the balance of prejudice under LA 1980, s 33 favoured allowing the personal injury claim to proceed. Written by James Tunley, barrister at Lamb Chambers.

ARCHIVED : This archived Practice Note covers the Fee-Paid Judicial Pension Scheme (FPJPS) established by the Judicial Pensions (Fee-Paid Judges) Regulations 2017, SI 2017/522 as a result of O’Brien v Ministry of Justice. This includes the statutory framework, governance, eligibility, contributions and benefit structure. It is not maintained. Statutory framework The Judicial Pension Scheme encompasses a number of schemes: • the Judicial Pension Scheme 1981 (JPS 1981). Salaried judges appointed before 31 March 1995 usually belong to this unfunded final salary scheme, which was established under JPA 1981 • the Judicial Pension Scheme 1993 (JPS 1993 or JUPRA). Salaried judges appointed between 31 March 1995 and 31 March 2015 usually belong to this unfunded final salary scheme, which was established under JPRA 1993. Note that: ◦ there is a right of election to transfer from the JPS 1981 to JUPRA at any time up to a date six months after retirement. For more information, see: Eligibility, below ◦ the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) commenced an options exercise in October 2023 to

ARCHIVED : This archived Practice Note covers the changes introduced by the Finance Act 2004 on A-day (6 April 2006) and the key characteristics of the post A-day pension tax regime. It is not maintained. For further information on the current pensions tax regime, see Practice Note: Tax treatment of pensions—an introduction. Changes made on A-day Registration The current pensions tax regime came into effect on A-day. Before A-day, pension schemes had to be classed as ‘exempt approved’ by the Inland Revenue (now HMRC) in order to receive favourable tax treatment. On and from A-day, this requirement was replaced with a requirement for occupational and personal pension schemes to be registered with HMRC. For further information, see Practice Note: Registration of pension schemes. Pension schemes that were exempt approved before A-day automatically became registered on A-day (unless the scheme administrator opted for the scheme not to become registered). For information on the pre-A day regime, see Practice Note: The pre A-day pensions tax

ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note looks at the pension changes made by the Finance Act 2011, including in relation to the lifetime and annual allowances, pension input periods, Scheme Pays, the relaxation of the requirement to take benefits at age 75, the removal of age 75 restrictions for lump sums and lump sum death benefits, double taxation and the disguised remuneration rules. It is not maintained and is for background information only. The Finance Act 2011 (FA 2011) received Royal Assent on 27 July 2011. FA 2011 enacted proposals (aimed at raising revenue) that were proposed by HM Treasury in July 2010 and confirmed on 14 October 2010, following concerns that earlier proposals put forward by the previous government disadvantaged high earners only and introduced more complexity to the tax system. This Practice Note looks at the changes made by the FA 2011 for registered and unregistered pension schemes, including in relation to: • the lifetime allowance • the annual allowance • pension input periods • the introduction of Scheme

Criteria for eligibility for the Financial Assistance Scheme The Financial Assistance Scheme (FAS) closed to Notification and Qualification of new pension schemes on 1 September 2016. Members who are in receipt of, or with a deferred entitlement to receive, assistance payments from the FAS are not affected by the closure. For benefits to be payable from the FAS, distinct but related criteria have to be satisfied in respect of: • a scheme • its sponsoring employer(s), and • individual members Generally, underfunded defined benefit schemes that started to wind up on or after 6 April 2005 should look to the Pension Protection Fund (PPF) to provide members with their promised benefits, rather than the FAS. However, the FAS may be appropriate where the scheme entered winding up on or after 6 April 2005 but its sponsoring employer had become insolvent before that date. The eligibility criteria and process for entry into the FAS are set out in the Financial Assistance Scheme Regulations 2005, SI 2005/1986 (the