header-logo header-logo

22 June 2017
Issue: 7751 / Categories: Bar Council , Legal News , Brexit , EU
printer mail-detail

Clock ticking on passporting rights

Critical for financial institutions that Brexit agenda covers passporting as soon as possible

It is vital to discuss passporting rights or transitional arrangements ‘as soon as possible’, a leading financial institutions lawyer warned this week as the Brexit negotiations got underway.

Rachel Kent, global head of financial institutions practice, Hogan Lovells, said the key concern for financial institutions is passporting, which allows firms authorised in the UK to operate in the European Economic Area, and vice versa. Passporting rights end once the UK leaves the EU. Therefore, financial institutions would need to have relocated parts of their business to the EU, with appropriate licensing, in order to continue trading.

Financial institutions are currently in the advanced stages of preparing their contingency plans, she said. The Bank of England has given firms until 14 July to submit these to the regulator, the Prudential Regulation Authority.

Kent warned that, given the level of preparation and expense required to move operations overseas, time may be running out. She said firms are reluctant to relocate, and equally unlikely to move back once they have moved.

‘It is critical for the industry that either a mutual access deal is agreed or transitional arrangements maintaining the status quo are put in place to take the pressure off for a further two or three years,’ she said.

‘We wait with bated breath for when this will make it on to the agenda. It needs to be done as soon as possible.

‘We are hoping for a bespoke mutual access deal, probably in the form of a free trade agreement, whereby all or some of the current passporting rights can be created. That would cause minimal disruption, and firms wouldn’t need to relocate.’

Meanwhile, Guy Lougher, head of Brexit advisory at Pinsent Masons, has warned the chances of agreeing a transitional arrangement on trade, let alone finalising and adopting a full new trade deal, ‘look slim’ as to do so would require the unanimous approval of all 27 EU countries.

He said companies are calculating the last date by when they must have taken any decision to move or adapt their business, and ‘realising they need to take a decision soon’.

Issue: 7751 / Categories: Bar Council , Legal News , Brexit , EU
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll