No abstract

There is a debate in the national and the European legal theory concerning the legal nature of Conduct of Business (CoB) rules and the organizational requirements provided for under MiFID. This paper deals with the impact of CoB rules and organizational requirements on private relationships and provides a survey of the relevant case law in Greece. It also analyses (a) the interrelation between CoB rules and organizational requirements and (b) aspects of contractual and non-contractual liability of an investment firm pursuant to Greek case law. Furthermore, we argue that the establishment of a single rulebook at the European level (MiFID II) will not impact on the current doctrinal analysis of CoB rules and organizational requirements in private relationships in Greece. Nevertheless, on a practical level, the new regulatory provisions are expected to strengthen civil law protection of investors.

The aim of this article is to illustrate the importance of the EU principle of proportionality for the application of the rules governing the composition and qualifications of credit institutions’ Board of Directors. The view taken is that the principle of proportionality as enshrined in the EU legislation and the case law can safeguard both the private and the public interests in favour of the smooth functioning of the banks and the stability of the financial system. Under this perspective, this article discusses special issues such as conditional approval, informal assessment, allocation of the burden of proof and judicial review.

No abstract

There is a general consensus in the legal literature that illiquid markets are prone to manipulation. However, the question is not as simple as it appears to be. A plethora of provisions reveals that the European legislator is sceptical regarding the reliability of the price-formation mechanism in illiquid markets. Illiquidity constitutes a structural problem of the market, and illiquid markets are generally considered inefficient markets. The aim of this article is to analyse the relation between market illiquidity and market manipulation in terms of legality. We claim that the nature of the market affects the application of market-manipulation provisions and market-manipulation indicators. Issues such as causation, mental elements and standard of proof are strongly affected by illiquidity. The basis for this argument is that investors should not be condemned for a natural market phenomenon.