Capital Markets Law Journal Advance Access originally published online on November 28, 2008
Capital Markets Law Journal 2009 4(1):63-84; doi:10.1093/cmlj/kmn033
© The Author (2008). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org
Hedge fund regulation, market discipline and the Hedge Fund Working Group
Harry McVea*
*Harry McVea, Reader in Law, University of Bristol.
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Key points- Against a general background of suspicion, criticism and even hostility, the recently formed Hedge Fund Working Group (HFWG), comprising 14 leading fund managers based mainly in the United Kingdom, published their Final Report in January 2008.
- The Report is based on standards of best practice (the Standards of which there are 28) that are, in the final analysis, to be administered by a newly established Hedge Fund Standards Board (HFSB)—a self-regulatory body charged with the responsibility of keeping the Standards up-to-date and fit for purpose.
- Borrowing from both the Financial Services Authority's Principles for Business, which represent bold statements of good business practice within the UK's financial services sector, and the Combined Code on Corporate Governance's voluntary approach of comply or explain, the Standards are heralded by the HFWG as an exercise in market discipline, based on disclosure.
- The unprecedented nature of recent financial market . . . [Full Text of this Article]
|
 |
1. Introduction
|
|---|
 |
2. Disclosure (including side letters)
|
|---|
 |
3. Valuation concerns
|
|---|
 |
4. Risk management
|
|---|
 |
5. Fund governance
|
|---|
 |
6. Market abuse
|
|---|
 |
7. Activism
|
|---|
 |
8. An assessment
|
|---|
 |
9. Conclusion
|
|---|

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