scholarly journals Partnerships for disaster risk insurance in the EU

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 2403-2419 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaroslav Mysiak ◽  
C. Dionisio Pérez-Blanco
Keyword(s):  
Natural Hazard ◽  
State Budget ◽  
Natural Catastrophes ◽  
Regulatory Constraints ◽  
Conflicting Objectives ◽  
European Regulatory ◽  
Management Schemes ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Risk Insurance ◽  
The Eu

Abstract. With increasing costs inflicted by natural hazard perils, and amidst state budget cuts, concerns are mounting about the capacity of governments to design sustainable, equitable and affordable risk management schemes. The participation of the private sector along with the public one through public–private partnerships (PPPs) has gained importance as a means of providing catastrophic natural hazard insurance to address these seemingly conflicting objectives. In 2013 the European Commission launched a wide-ranging consultation about what EU action could be appropriate to improve the performance of insurance markets. Simultaneously, the EU legislator instigated major reforms in the legislation and regulations that pertain to how PPPs are designed or operate. This paper has a dual objective: first, we review and summarize the manifold legal background that influences the provision of insurance against natural catastrophes. Second, we examine how PPPs designed for sharing and transferring risk operate within the European regulatory constraints, illustrated using the example of the UK Flood Reinsurance Scheme (Flood RE) between the state and the Association of British Insurers.

scholarly journals Partnerships for affordable and equitable disaster insurance

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (8) ◽  
pp. 4797-4832 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Mysiak ◽  
C. D. Pérez-Blanco
Keyword(s):  
Private Sector ◽  
Extreme Events ◽  
Natural Hazard ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Natural Catastrophes ◽  
Disaster Insurance ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Conflicting Objectives ◽  
Recovery Strategies ◽  
The Eu

Abstract. Extreme events are becoming more frequent and intense, inflating the economic damages and social hardship set-off by natural catastrophes. Amidst budgetary cuts, there is a growing concern on societies' ability to design solvent disaster recovery strategies, while addressing equity and affordability concerns. The participation of private sector along with public one through Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) has gained on importance as a means to address these seemingly conflicting objectives through the provision of (catastrophic) natural hazard insurance. This is the case of many OECD countries, notably some EU Member States such as the United Kingdom and Spain. The EU legislator has adapted to this new scenario and recently produced major reforms in the legislation and regulation that govern the framework in which PPPs for (catastrophic) natural hazard insurance develop. This paper has a dual objective: (1) review the complex legal background that rules the provision of insurance against natural catastrophes in the EU after these major reforms, (2) assess the implications of the reforms and offer concise Policy Guiding Principles.

Developing Trade in Services

2019 ◽  
Vol 250 ◽  
pp. R30-R33
Author(s):  
Alexis P. Lautenberg
Keyword(s):  
Financial Services ◽  
Trade In Services ◽  
Executive Summary ◽  
Services Sector ◽  
Regulatory Standards ◽  
European Regulatory ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

Executive SummaryServices are simultaneously the most important sector of the UK economy and the sector facing the biggest challenge as a result of Brexit. The prospective departure from the European Single Market reduces the UK to the status of ‘3rd country’ in respect of services. Accessing the internal market will depend on both subjective and objective conditions that differ from sector to sector, requiring detailed and highly specific arrangements for such industries as aviation and financial services.In practice, the EU can be expected to use these circumstances to discourage the UK from significantly diverging from European regulatory norms, as a matter of policy. In view of the weakness of, and uncertainty surrounding, international moves to oversee, let alone to further liberalise, trade in services, Brexit will thus leave the UK's services sector – and especially financial services – uniquely isolated and exposed. The government will hence need to consider carefully the costs of decisions to diverge from EU regulatory standards, and should be giving great priority to establishing clear objectives for close cooperation between the UK and the EU policy makers and regulators.

scholarly journals Euro clearing after Brexit: shifting locations and oversight

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sven Van Kerckhoven ◽  
Jed Odermatt
Keyword(s):  
The European Union ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Financial Centre ◽  
European Regulatory ◽  
Financial Infrastructure ◽  
The Uk ◽  
City Of London ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The City ◽  
The Eu

Purpose This paper investigates the impact of moving Central Counterparty Clearing Houses (CCPs) that clear euro-denominated transactions to the Eurozone after the withdrawal of the UK from the European Union. Prior to Brexit, the City of London had a dominant position in euro-clearing, but in the aftermath of Brexit, clearing houses might decide to move to the EU27. This paper aims to investigate the impact of moving euro-clearing to the EU27. Design/methodology/approach This paper provides an economic, political and legal investigation based on desk research. It studies the relevant materials, as they relate to the functioning of Central Counterparty Clearing in the aftermath of Brexit, with specific attention to the potential shift of locations and oversight. Findings The development of a EU27 financial hub and the possibility to increase oversight over euro-denominated financial transactions, which were partly at the roots of the financial and Eurozone crisis, could strengthen the market shaping of European financial markets. However, localizing euro-denominated transactions in Europe could potentially give rise to efficiency losses and a higher risk for companies and investors. Furthermore, the European regulatory framework currently faces certain weaknesses, obstructing the regulatory potential of the EU. Research limitations/implications As the Brexit negotiations are not yet finished, this paper does not intend to set out a definite outcome of the processes currently taking place. Practical implications Shifting locations and oversight of CCPs as a result of Brexit could lead to the establishment of a large financial centre within the EU-27. At the same time, it is to be expected that such a development will have a significant impact on the financial infrastructure of the City of London. Originality/value There exists an important trade-off with regard to shifting locations that need to be at the forefront of the discussions and the negotiations when dealing with Brexit. This seems to be neglected in a lot of the current policy debates. This paper takes stock of the ongoing debate and how it relates to the functioning of CCPs.

Direct lending by funds: a comparison of the key EU jurisdictions

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 59-66
Author(s):  
Thomas Smith ◽  
Patricia Volhard ◽  
Alan Davies ◽  
Pierre Maugüé ◽  
Marco Paruzzolo
Keyword(s):  
Financial Services ◽  
Market Access ◽  
Regulatory Regime ◽  
Key Factors ◽  
Content Type ◽  
European Regulatory ◽  
European Regulations ◽  
Direct Lending ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

Purpose To compare the key EU regimes regulating direct lending by private funds. Design/methodology/approach Provides a summary of the key factors to be examined when looking at the provision of direct loans by private funds in the key jurisdictions, followed by a summary of existing pan-European regulations, followed by a focus regulations in on the UK, Germany, France and Italy. Findings The liberalisation of the national regimes for loan origination by funds in many European Union jurisdictions is a welcome development for both credit fund sponsors wishing to access investment opportunities in these jurisdictions and the borrowers unable to secure adequate financing from traditional sources such as banks. At the same time, the creation of a pan-European regulatory regime, with a passport for lending activities, would further facilitate market access by loan originating funds, as long as such regime does not impose onerous burdens or unnecessary restrictions on the funds and their managers. Practical implications The article gives an insight on the relative opportunities for direct lending funds in the EU, and how best to structure to take advantage of them. Originality/value Practical guidance from experienced financial services lawyers

Brexit and the EU Area of Freedom, Security, and Justice

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deirdre Curtin
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Data Retention ◽  
Free Zone ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

UK involvement in the EU Area of Freedom, Security, and Justice (AFSJ) has been patchy. It never joined the Schengen border-free zone, and when in 2014 it exercised a block exit from all AFSJ measures, it selectively rejoined a substantial number. Even if partially outside, the UK has been a leader inside. Advanced intelligence capabilities meant it provided important support to the functioning of agencies such as Europol and UK laws inspired EU laws, for example, on data retention. The need to preserve some pragmatic forms of cooperation between the UK and the EU is obvious and shared by the UK security establishment. There is a partial institutional precedent . When Denmark rejected participation in Europol in a popular referendum, the Danish government obtained a deal from the EU institutions which allows it to remain associated to Europol as a ‘third country’ (and a Member State). The bespoke Brexit reality may prove even more complex.

The Law & Politics of Brexit: Volume II

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Comprehensive Analysis ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Trade Relations ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Financial Settlement ◽  
The Eu

This book provides the first comprehensive analysis of the withdrawal agreement concluded between the United Kingdom and the European Union to create the legal framework for Brexit. Building on a prior volume, it overviews the process of Brexit negotiations that took place between the UK and the EU from 2017 to 2019. It also examines the key provisions of the Brexit deal, including the protection of citizens’ rights, the Irish border, and the financial settlement. Moreover, the book assesses the governance provisions on transition, decision-making and adjudication, and the prospects for future EU–UK trade relations. Finally, it reflects on the longer-term challenges that the implementation of the 2016 Brexit referendum poses for the UK territorial system, for British–Irish relations, as well as for the future of the EU beyond Brexit.

scholarly journals Fishery Logistics Insurance Management Schemes

2012 ◽  
Vol 6-7 ◽  
pp. 773-777 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan Ling Wang
Keyword(s):  
Supply Chain ◽  
Insurance Contract ◽  
Insurance Companies ◽  
Supply Chain Risk ◽  
Exact Probability ◽  
Supply Chain Contract ◽  
High Expectations ◽  
Management Schemes ◽  
Contract Signing ◽  
Risk Insurance

The intense competition of global markets and consumers' high expectations forced enterprises to invest and concentrate on the relationship with their customers and suppliers. The growing interest in supply chain management, both in developed and developing countries in the fisheries. With the catastrophic events in the fisheries supply chain, the diversity of the fisheries risk and insurance issues become increasingly important. However, participants in the supply chain is a separate and independent economic entities, and only consider their own interests. In this article, the fisheries supply chain insurance contract on the basis of the model and the diversity of the fisheries risk and insurance policy issues, the behavior of each participant. In this article, the diversity of the fisheries supply chain risk and insurance process, the lack of sufficient knowledge of the fisheries supply chain contract signing or the exact probability of the insured event, the fisheries supply chain risk insurance companies use the information provided by the fisheries supply chain contract signature the signing of the contract or the behavior of the fisheries supply chain insurers of people insured or fisheries supply chain and fisheries supply chain in order to establish the parameters of the insurance contract of the fisheries supply chain.

Medical Device Regulation: Requirements for Dental Professionals Who Prescribe and Manufacture Custom-Made Devices

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-88
Author(s):  
James I. J. Green
Keyword(s):  
Medical Device ◽  
Medical Devices ◽  
Transition Period ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Custom Made ◽  
Dental Setting ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Dental Professionals ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Medical Device Regulation

A custom-made device (CMD) is a medical device intended for the sole use of a particular patient. In a dental setting, CMDs include prosthodontic devices, orthodontic appliances, bruxism splints, speech prostheses and devices for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnoea, trauma prevention and orthognathic surgery facilitation (arch bars and interocclusal wafers). Since 1993, the production and provision of CMDs have been subject to European Union (EU) Directive 93/42/EEC (Medical Device Directive, MDD) given effect in the UK by The Medical Devices Regulations 2002 (Statutory Instrument 2002/618), and its subsequent amendments. Regulation (EU) 2017/745 (Medical Device Regulation, EU MDR) replaces the MDD and the other EU Directive pertaining to Medical Devices, Council Directive 90/385/EEC (Active Implantable Medical Device Directive, AIMDD). The EU MDR was published on 5 April 2017, came into force on 25 May 2017 and, following a three-year transition period was due to be fully implemented and repeal the MDD on 26 May 2020, but was deferred until 26 May 2021 due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In the UK, in preparation for the country’s planned departure from the EU, the EU MDR, with necessary amendments, was transposed into UK law (Medical Devices (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, UK MDR). The UK left the Union on 31 January 2020 and entered a transition period that ended on 31 December 2020, meaning that, from 1 January 2021, dental professionals in Great Britain who prescribe and manufacture CMDs are mandated to do so in accordance with the new legislation while Northern Ireland remains in line with the EU legislation and implementation date. This paper sets out the requirements that relate to the production and provision of CMDs in a UK dental setting.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document