Skip Navigation

Capital Markets Law Journal 2007 2(4):329-331; doi:10.1093/cmlj/kmm033
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in Capital Markets Law Journal
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.

CMLJ Express

A rapid-read overview of the main items in this issue

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.


   How to compare regulatory regimes (see p. 332)
 
Philip R. Wood

This article examines the criteria which might usefully be used to distinguish between the regulatory law of the various jurisdictions of which there are about 320 in the world, representing about 193 sovereign states. There is considerable divergence in other areas in financial law, basically resulting from divergences in insolvency law which is the root of financial law. Examples are the varying attitudes to security interests, insolvency set-off and the use of the trust in the financial sphere, such as book entry settlement systems and custodianship of investments. In relation to regulatory law, however, there is considered to be substantial harmony and convergence of the underlying concepts, such as fiduciary duties and the responsibility for offering circulars. The main differences relate to such matters as . . . [Full Text of this Article]


   The evolution of regulatory enforcement action in the UK capital markets: a case of ‘less is more’? (see p. 345)
 

   Retail cascading in Germany—a model for a revision of the PD? (see p. 370)
 

   The FCPA and analogous foreign anti-bribery laws—overview, recent developments, and acquisition due diligence (see p. 381)
 

   Best execution and competition between trading venues—MiFID's likely impact (see p. 404)
 

   Loan only credit default swaps—the new European standard form (see p. 414)
 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?

Related articles in Capital Markets Law Journal:

How to compare regulatory regimes
Philip R. Wood
Capital Markets Law Journal 2007 2: 332-344. [Extract] [Full Text]  

The evolution of regulatory enforcement action in the UK capital markets: a case of ‘less is more’?
Iain MacNeil
Capital Markets Law Journal 2007 2: 345-369. [Extract] [Full Text]  

Retail cascading in Germany—a model for a revision of the PD?
Hannes Schneider and Hendrik Haag
Capital Markets Law Journal 2007 2: 370-380. [Extract] [Full Text]  

The FCPA and analogous foreign anti-bribery laws—overview, recent developments, and acquisition due diligence
Eugene R. Erbstoesser, John H. Sturc, and John W.F. Chesley
Capital Markets Law Journal 2007 2: 381-403. [Extract] [Full Text]  

Best execution and competition between trading venues—MiFID's likely impact
Guido Ferrarini
Capital Markets Law Journal 2007 2: 404-413. [Extract] [Full Text]  

Loan only credit default swaps—the new European standard form
Martin Bartlam and Karin Artmann
Capital Markets Law Journal 2007 2: 414-426. [Extract] [Full Text]