82,891
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
=== | ===Custody delegation under {{t|UCITS}} and {{t|AIFMD}} looks kind of similar doesn’t it?=== | ||
Yes, | Yes, it does. The textual differences betwixt {{t|UCITS}} (Art {{ucits5prov|22a}}) and {{t|AIFMD}} (Art {{aifmdprov|21(11)}}) are ''largely'' formal, or ''[[mutatis mutandis]]'' in style. The substantive differences are that a {{t|UCITS}} {{ucits5prov|depositary}}: | ||
*cannot [[reuse]] the UCITS’ assets ''at all'', whereas an AIFMD {{aifmdprov|depositary}} can, with prior notification and consent; | |||
* | *must take all necessary steps to ensure {{t|UCITS}}’ assets aren’t caught up in the bankruptcy estate of an insolvent delegate custodian — there isn’t an equivalent provision under {{t|AIFMD}}, though perhaps you might imply it; | ||
* | *must notify {{t|UCITS}} investors of the risks of delegation where a non-EEA jurisdiction requires use of a local custodian and no local entities satisfy the delegation requirements and not just the fact of, and circumstances justifying, it. |