Template:Nutshell UCITS V 22a(3): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Created page with "{{ucits5prov|22a(3)}}. The {{ucits5prov|depositary}} may delegate its Art. {{ucits5prov|22(5)}} safekeeping function to a third party only where the delegate at all times: <..." |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ucits5prov|22a(3)}}. The {{ucits5prov|depositary}} may delegate | {{ucits5prov|22a(3)}}. The {{ucits5prov|depositary}} may delegate safekeeping functions only where that delegate: <br> | ||
:(a) is competent | :(a) is competent to look after the assets of the {{tag|UCITS}} given to it; <br> | ||
:(b) where it holds custodiable assets, the delegate is properly prudentially regulated in its it its own jurisdiction and regularly audited on its custody holdings; <br> | |||
:(c) effectively segregates the UCITS assets from its own assets and those of the {{ucits5prov|depositary}} so they can be clearly identified as belonging to clients of the depositary<ref>Does this leave the door open for omnibus segregation of different funds managed by the same depositary?</ref>; <br> | |||
:(d) takes steps to ensure that if it is insolvent, the {{ucits5prov|UCITS}}’s assets that it holds are isolated from its creditors; and <br> | |||
:(c) segregates the | :(e) complies generally with Articles {{ucits5prov|22(2)}}, {{ucits5prov|22(5)}}, {{ucits5prov|22(7)}} and {{ucits5prov|25}}.<br> | ||
:(d) | :Where local rules require financial instruments to be held by a local custodian and none are effectively regulated or audited, the {{ucits5prov|depositary}} may delegate to a non-compliant local custodian only as far as is required by those local rules, and only as long as there are no compliant local custodians, and only where: | ||
:(e) complies with | :(a) the {{tag|UCITS}} investors are informed of these circumstances and the associated risks before they invest; <br> | ||
:Where local | :(b) the {{tag|UCITS}} management company has instructed the {{ucits5prov|depositary}} to make the delegation. <br> | ||
:(a) | :The delegate may sub-delegate on the same terms. In such a case, Article {{ucits5prov|24(2)}} shall apply ''[[mutatis mutandis]]'' to the relevant parties. <br> | ||
:(b) the {{tag|UCITS}} | |||
:The delegate may sub-delegate |
Revision as of 16:41, 28 March 2019
22a(3). The depositary may delegate safekeeping functions only where that delegate:
- (a) is competent to look after the assets of the UCITS given to it;
- (b) where it holds custodiable assets, the delegate is properly prudentially regulated in its it its own jurisdiction and regularly audited on its custody holdings;
- (c) effectively segregates the UCITS assets from its own assets and those of the depositary so they can be clearly identified as belonging to clients of the depositary[1];
- (d) takes steps to ensure that if it is insolvent, the UCITS’s assets that it holds are isolated from its creditors; and
- (e) complies generally with Articles 22(2), 22(5), 22(7) and 25.
- Where local rules require financial instruments to be held by a local custodian and none are effectively regulated or audited, the depositary may delegate to a non-compliant local custodian only as far as is required by those local rules, and only as long as there are no compliant local custodians, and only where:
- (a) the UCITS investors are informed of these circumstances and the associated risks before they invest;
- (b) the UCITS management company has instructed the depositary to make the delegation.
- The delegate may sub-delegate on the same terms. In such a case, Article 24(2) shall apply mutatis mutandis to the relevant parties.
- ↑ Does this leave the door open for omnibus segregation of different funds managed by the same depositary?