82,976
edits
Permitted Receivers - OneNDA Provision: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Permitted Receivers - OneNDA Provision (view source)
Revision as of 12:48, 30 May 2019
, 30 May 2019no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
*'''[[Professional advisers]]''': Not usually controversial because they are by nature bound by professional protocol and [[Fiduciary duty|fiduciary duties]] to respect [[confidentiality]] and may even buy you legal [[privilege]] for whatever that is worth these days. | *'''[[Professional advisers]]''': Not usually controversial because they are by nature bound by professional protocol and [[Fiduciary duty|fiduciary duties]] to respect [[confidentiality]] and may even buy you legal [[privilege]] for whatever that is worth these days. | ||
*'''Employees''': The corporate veil may be impermeable but you do need someone with a head, any kind of head, and a beating heart to read and deal with the {{confiprov|confidential information}} on the [[limited company]]’s behalf — but more fearful types may try to restrict which of your employees are in the gang (see below). | *'''Employees''': The corporate veil may be impermeable but you do need someone with a head, any kind of head, and a beating heart to read and deal with the {{confiprov|confidential information}} on the [[limited company]]’s behalf — but more fearful types may try to restrict which of your employees are in the gang (see below). | ||
*'''[[Regulator|Regulators]]''' — compulsory disclosure to competent regulatory bodies, courts, and so on. Marginally more controversial is the obligation to disclose at polite but non-binding request of regulators. In any case, don’t agree to notify your counterparty of any regulatory requests. They may hotly insist they need to right to challenge the disclosure or take out an injunction or something but | *'''[[Regulator|Regulators]]''' — compulsory disclosure to competent regulatory bodies, courts, and so on. Marginally more controversial is the obligation to disclose at polite but non-binding request of regulators. In any case, don’t agree to notify your counterparty of any regulatory requests. They may hotly insist they need to right to challenge the disclosure or take out an injunction or something but — well, yeah. ''Sure''. For a better reason, see below. | ||
===Who’s out=== | ===Who’s out=== | ||
*Employees who don't have a [[need to know]]: Especially those employed in front office trading capacities. The [[agent lending]] market has developed sophisticated masking strategies so that borrower’s books and records don’t carry the identities of their principals. If you are in the business of bringing in new clients don’t be alarmed at requests to restrict disclosure to [[KYC]], [[credit]], [[compliance]] and onboarding teams. | *Employees who don't have a [[need to know]]: Especially those employed in front office trading capacities. The [[agent lending]] market has developed sophisticated masking strategies so that borrower’s books and records don’t carry the identities of their principals. If you are in the business of bringing in new clients don’t be alarmed at requests to restrict disclosure to [[KYC]], [[credit]], [[compliance]] and onboarding teams. | ||