Template:Ucits delegaton versus aifmd delegation: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "==={{t|UCITS}} Art {{ucits5prov|22a}} looks a lot like {{t|AIFMD}} Art {{aifmdprov|21(11)}} doesn’t it?=== Yes, it does. the textual differences are largely formal, or mut...") |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==={{t|UCITS}} Art {{ucits5prov|22a}} looks a lot like {{t|AIFMD}} Art {{aifmdprov|21(11)}} doesn’t it?=== | ==={{t|UCITS}} Art {{ucits5prov|22a}} looks a lot like {{t|AIFMD}} Art {{aifmdprov|21(11)}} doesn’t it?=== | ||
Yes, it does. the textual differences are largely formal, or [[mutatis mutandis]] style. The main substantive differences are: | Yes, it does. the textual differences are largely formal, or [[mutatis mutandis]] style. The main substantive differences are: | ||
*A UCITS {{ucits5prov|depositary}} is not allowed to reuse the UCITS’ assets at all, rather that only with prior notification and consent as under AIFMD; | *A {{t|UCITS}} {{ucits5prov|depositary}} is not allowed to reuse the UCITS’ assets at all, rather that only with prior notification and consent as under AIFMD; | ||
*A UCITS depositary must take all necessary steps to ensure UCITS’ assets aren’t caught up in the bankruptcy estate of an insolvent custodian | *A {{t|UCITS}} {{ucits5prov|depositary}}must take all necessary steps to ensure UCITS’ assets aren’t caught up in the bankruptcy estate of an insolvent custodian; | ||
*UCITS investors must be notified of the risks of delegation and not just the circumstances justifying it. | *Where a non-EEA jurisdiction requires use of a local custodian and no local entities satisfy the delegation requirements, {{t|UCITS}} investors must be notified of the risks of such a delegation and not just the fact or, and circumstances justifying, it. | ||
Revision as of 11:15, 25 July 2019
UCITS Art 22a looks a lot like AIFMD Art 21(11) doesn’t it?
Yes, it does. the textual differences are largely formal, or mutatis mutandis style. The main substantive differences are:
- A UCITS depositary is not allowed to reuse the UCITS’ assets at all, rather that only with prior notification and consent as under AIFMD;
- A UCITS depositarymust take all necessary steps to ensure UCITS’ assets aren’t caught up in the bankruptcy estate of an insolvent custodian;
- Where a non-EEA jurisdiction requires use of a local custodian and no local entities satisfy the delegation requirements, UCITS investors must be notified of the risks of such a delegation and not just the fact or, and circumstances justifying, it.