header-logo header-logo

15 January 2016 / Bianca Venkata
Issue: 7682 / Categories: Features , Regulatory
printer mail-detail

A change of heart

nlj_7682_venkata

Bianca Venkata heralds the coming into force of the new senior management regime

On 7 March 2016 the new senior management regime (the regime) will come into force. The regime introduces three key requirements which aim to hold senior managers to account. On 15 October 2015 HM Treasury announced that it was removing the controversial “reverse burden of proof” from the regime. This is despite the fact that the reverse burden of proof was strongly recommended by the Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards (PCBS) and supported by the government, Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

This article considers three key requirements of the regime and the impact of the removal of the reverse burden of proof.

Background

The financial crisis in 2008 fundamentally changed the perception of the financial sector. The global credit crunch resulted in the near collapse of the banking system. The government invested £37bn to bail out Royal Bank of Scotland, Lloyds TSB, and HBOS. In December 2008, the FTSE 100 closed down by 31.3%, the biggest

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll