| 1. |
- Andersen, Paul Krüger, et al.
(författare)
-
Response to the Proposal for a Directive on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence by Nordic and Baltic Company Law Scholars
- 2022
-
Annan publikation (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- On February 23, 2022, The EU Commission published its Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937 (“CSDDD” or “the Proposal”). The purpose of the Proposal, to further the “Union’s transition to a climate-neutral and green economy in line with the European Green Deal and in delivering on the UN Sustainable Development Goals”, is of great importance, and the Commission’s initiative is therefore commendable. However, it is our firm opinion that the Proposal should not be enacted in its present form, and that if it were to be, it would not only damage European businesses but also run the risk of having an adverse effect on both the transition to a climate-neutral economy as well as the goal of delivering on the UN Sustainable Development Goals. This is to a large extent because many of the Proposal’s provisions are excessive, unfounded and disproportionate and as such in violation of the fundamental principles of subsidiarity and proportionality safeguarded by Art. 5 TEU as well as having a questionable basis in Art. 50 TFEU. Furthermore and in regard of procedure, we find that the presentation of the Proposal by the Commission represents a disregard for the principles of better regulation that should not pass unnoticed and must be observed in the future to maintain trust in the legislative process of the Union.In this response to the consultation, we have presented an analysis of the key issues of the Proposal from a corporate governance perspective. We have divided the response into two parts: one on the pure corporate governance parts of the Proposal (article 15, 25 and 26) and one of the due diligence parts of the Proposal. With regards to the corporate governance parts of the Proposal, our conclusion is that they, by and large, should not be included in the proposed directive at all. Including them would in several ways be in breach of the EU principles on subsidiarity and proportionality, but perhaps more importantly, they are not only unsubstantiated by available empirical evidence on corporate behaviour, but also refuted by what we know. There is also good reason to believe that the proposed rules on director’s duties and environmental remuneration would risk decreasing the effectiveness of the stock markets within the EU contrary to the goal of a Capital Market Union, which also risk slowing down the necessary transition to a green economy and the goals of the EU Green Deal. The regulation necessary for the Capital Market Union and the EU Green Deal should complement each other, not collide as would be the outcome if the Proposal is adopted in its present form.With regards to the due diligence parts of the Proposal, our criticism is limited to corporate governance aspects and far less fundamental. We primarily believe that grounds for harmonisation needs further consideration in the present very challenging times, that Article 22 on Civil Liability might in several ways be counter-productive to the goals of the Proposal, that the effects on SMEs as well as for the financial companies included covered by the Proposal warrants further analysis, that the choice to focus the Proposal on individual companies instead of company groups needs to be reviewed, and that a risk based approach should be taken rather than an approach were companies are unable to focus their efforts to where they can be most effective. Overall, these issues can be worked out, but if they are not, then the proposed directive would not only have a severe adverse impact on EU companies and possibly capital markets, but might actually hinder EU companies from acting in the way that the Proposal aims for them to do.This joint response to the public consultation is made by a group of Nordic and Baltic company law scholars who, although we may not agree on every detail, do share the main arguments and grave concerns expressed here.
|
|
| 2. |
- Elliot, Viktor, et al.
(författare)
-
Anti-Money Laundering Regulation and Supply Chain Trade Finance
- 2020
-
Ingår i: International Trade Law & Regulation. - 1357-3136. ; 26:4, s. 246-261
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- New, and stricter, Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Counter the Financing of Terrorism (CFT) regulations are under progress. This article discusses potential unintended consequences for supply chain trade finance. We elaborate on how banks in the Nordic region have adapted in light of the recent AML scandals and the new regulatory regime.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Nilsson, Annika, et al.
(författare)
-
HFD 2022 ref. 23. Fråga om det finns skäl att avstå från ingripande genom beslut om sanktionsavgift enligt lagen med kompletterande bestämmelser till EU:s marknadsmissbruksförordning och, om så inte är fallet, hur storleken på sanktionsavgiften ska bestämmas.
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Förvaltningsrättslig Tidskrift. - 0015-8585. ; 3, s. 351-361
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Den 8 juni 2022 meddelande Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen dom i frågor som sällan prövas i högre instanser i Sverige. Målet gällde hur sanktionsavgifter ska beslutas och hur storleken på avgiftsbelopp ska bestämmas. Ämnet är ofta oklart och det finns inte mycket av allmän systematik eller teoribildning att falla tillbaka på, varför prejudikat på området är välkommet.1 Mer specifikt handlade prövningen om Finansinspektionens (FI) sanktionsbeslut avseende felaktig transaktionsanmälan från insynspersoner.I målet behandlades huvudsakligen två centrala rättsfrågor: 1) frågan om ifall FI bort avstå från ingripande genom sanktionsavgifter när den aktuella informationen meddelats marknaden på annat sätt än den föreskrivna, 2) hur annars sanktionsavgifterna skulle beräknas enligt EU:s marknadsmissbrukförordning (MAR) och i enlighet med proportionalitetsprincipen. I praktiken tenderar bedömningarna att styras av myndighetspraxis, vilket väcker flera kritiska konstitutionellrättsligt präglade frågor.2 I detta mål behandlas därmed också 3) frågan om vilken roll och status som FI:s vägledande schablontabeller bör ha när sanktionsavgifterna bestäms och beräknas.
|
|
| 5. |
- Söderström, Rebecca, 1984-
(författare)
-
Bonus i banker – om sundhet, incitament och risktagande
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Juridisk Tidskrift. - Stockholm. - 1100-7761 .- 2002-3545. ; 3, s. 670-709
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Artikeln behandar reglerna om rörlig ersättning till ledande befattningshavare i kreditinstitut. Artikeln redogör ingående för olika forskningsbidrag på området och utvärderar incitamentsstrukturer och ersättningars påverkan på dessa i banker.
|
|
| 6. |
- Söderström, Rebecca, 1984-
(författare)
-
Direct financial supervision in the EU and financial stability
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Nordisk Tidsskrift for Selskabsret. - 1399-140X. ; :3
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Direct financial supervision includes powers to investigate the supervised firm or entity fully; to conduct on-site inspections; to address sanctions such as fines, periodic penalty payments, and other administrative sanctions; and to have full mandate to enforce applicable legal requirements. In the EU, such powers were long only at Member States’ disposal to confer on national competent authorities in the field of financial market supervision. Since the financial crisis of 2007–2008, a new system of financial supervision has been established on Union level. It partly includes direct financial supervision, and the powers have been increased over the years since the crisis. The development is part of the regulatory tightening of the EU financial markets since the financial crisis, driven mainly by the concern of financial stability. Moving supervisory competence from Member State level to Union level brings forth several issues, such as constitutional aspects, coordination challenges, and efficiency of the conductance of supervision. Most importantly, perhaps, is the issue of reasons for direct EU financial supervision. Can financial stability justify a shift of competence from national to EU level in this field, and if so, to what extent? This article discusses the rationale of financial stability and its relation to direct financial supervision on EU level.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Söderström, Rebecca, 1984-
(författare)
-
Sverige och bankunionen - några synpunkter
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Juridisk Tidskrift. - Stockholm. - 1100-7761 .- 2002-3545. ; 1, s. 281-284
-
Tidskriftsartikel (populärvet., debatt m.m.)abstract
- I december utkom Finansdepartementets betänkande om Sverige och bankunio-nen (SOU 2019:52). Betänkandet innehåller en analys av olika konsekvenseroch effekter av ett svenskt deltagande i Europeiska bankunionen. Utredningenär genomgripande och täcker in många aspekter, vilket ger bra utgångspunk-ter för diskussion framgent. De diskussioner som ska föras är främst politiska,eftersom det i slutändan är ett politiskt beslut om Sverige ska gå med i bankunio-nen eller inte. Betänkande ger även en god grund för en rättslig diskussion, inteminst kopplat till hur den finansiella tillsynen skulle påverkas av ett deltagande.Jag kommer nedan redogöra för några tankar som väckts när det gäller tillsynenöver banker med anledning av betänkandet.
|
|
