header-logo header-logo

30 March 2012 / Paul Adams , Lista M Cannon
Issue: 7507 / Categories: Opinion , Regulatory
printer mail-detail

Twin peaks regulation

Will the proposed changes to financial regulation work, ask Lista M Cannon & Paul Adams

Since the start of the financial crisis in 2007, the “tripartite” model of financial regulation, which saw responsibility for financial regulation shared between HM Treasury, the Bank of England and the Financial Services Authority (FSA), has been widely criticised for its inability to prevent, and effectively deal with, the financial crisis. Under the tripartite model, the FSA has responsibility for:

  • the direct supervision of all regulated firms for both prudential and conduct of business purposes; and
  • taking enforcement action against firms where it identifies regulatory failures.

The FSA’s “light touch” approach to regulation was widely criticised as inadequate and the decision was taken that its operating model needed to change.

On 27 January 2012, the government published the Financial Services Bill (the Bill). The Bill will introduce a new model of firm-specific regulation which will see the separation of “micro-prudential” regulation (or the regulation of individual firms’ financial stability through the monitoring and assessment of

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

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll