Author Archives: Peter Sester

FinSA Business Conduct Rules and MiFID II

The following article deals with the differences between the rules of conduct under MiFID II and FinSA. In the first part, the initial situation is described. Subsequently, the individual differences are discussed in more detail. The main differences in regulation can be found in the areas of client segmentation, definition of the service types, appropriateness and suitability test and dealing with retrocessions.

By Peter Sester / Dario Sutter (Reference: CapLaw-2018-62)

FinSA Business Conduct Rules and MiFID II

European legislation as well as other international standards increasingly influence Swiss financial market regulation; the new Financial Services Act (FinSA) is the direct consequence. As expected, the Swiss legislator tailored the new business conduct rules towards the EU directive. The remaining questions, however, lie in the interpretation, application, and development of the new provisions by the regulatory authorities and courts.

By Peter Sester / Linus Zweifel (Reference: CapLaw-2016-6)

The European Capital Market Union

Only two years ago the European Union adopted two regulations that serve as the pillars of the European Banking Union. In October 2015, the Commission launched an ambitious plan to establish a European Capital Market Union until 2019. Although both “unions” go in the same direction – an even more integrated and centralized European financial market – and use the same institutional instruments, they are based on a different motivation.

By Peter Sester (Reference: CapLaw-2015-56)

The Opinion of the Advocate General on the Announced Bond-Buying Program of the ECB

Never before has an opinion of a European Advocate General had such a severe impact on Switzerland as the one published on the request for preliminary ruling in the so-called OMT case, a government bond-buying program announced by the ECB in 2012. Only one day after the Advocate General basically rejected the legal concerns of the German Constitutional Court that had asked for preliminary ruling, the Swiss National Bank withdrew its previously made promise concerning the maximum exchange rate of the Swiss Franc vis-à-vis the Euro. The European Court of Justice has now ruled in the same direction as the Advocate General had recommended in its opinion.

by Peter Sester (Reference: CapLaw-2015-34)