Skip Navigation


Capital Markets Law Journal Advance Access originally published online on October 15, 2007
Capital Markets Law Journal 2007 2(4):370-380; doi:10.1093/cmlj/kmm027
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
2/4/370    most recent
kmm027v1
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 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 Articles by Schneider, H.
Right arrow Articles by Haag, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author (2007). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Retail cascading in Germany—a model for a revision of the PD?

Hannes Schneider and Hendrik Haag*
* Hannes Schneider, Partner; Hendrik Haag, Partner, Hengeler Mueller, Frankfurt am Main.

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.


Key points

  • The EU Prospectus Directive (the ‘PD’), as implemented in several EEA member states, including the United Kingdom, and the Regulation accompanying the PD (the ‘Regulation’) render difficult or even inhibit public offers of debt securities to retail investors.
  • Market participants and their advisors, trade associations such as the International Capital Market Association (‘ICMA’), as well as the United Kingdom Listing Authority (‘UKLA’) and the Committee of European Securities Regulators (‘CESR’) have been dealing with the issues. UKLA and ICMA have come forward by proposing a solution regarding the information requirements of Annex V.5 of the Regulation. The proposal is to utilize Article 23.4 of the Regulation allowing information required by the Regulation to be omitted if the information is not pertinent to the offer. CESR may take a wider approach. It has indicated its willingness to assess whether further Level 2 work is appropriate and legislative action will . . . [Full Text of this Article]

 

   1. Introduction
 

   2. The regime preceding the PD: the Public Offer Directive
 

   3. The Prospectus Directive
 

   4. Retail cascades in Germany
 
The legislative history of Section 3 (1) WpPG
Non-conforming transposition?
Discussion
Validity of prospectus, supplements to the prospectus and publication of inside information
Prospectus liability
Annex V.5 of the Regulation
Debt issuance programmes in particular

   5. A model for a revision of the PD?
 

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