​By Isabel Rodriguez King & Wood Mallesons’ Madrid office.

Directive 2011/61/EU, on Alternative Investment Fund Managers (“AIFMD,” hereinafter the “Directive“) entered into force on July 22, 2011, with a deadline for transposition by the Member States of July 22, 2013. This Directive was transposed into Spanish law by virtue of Law 22/2014 of November 12, which also amended Law 25/2005, governing the former legal framework for private equity.

Despite foreseeable initial concerns regarding the new legal framework, it is safe to say that, in general, the market has been able to easily adapt to the new rules. However, certain inefficiencies requiring correction have become clear, several of which are based on a lack of consistency in application of the regulations by each Member State, and others which are based on mere technical defects in the relevant regulations.
Continue Reading The Regulatory Framework in Perspective: Questions under Review

By Simon Holmes and Naomi Inns, King & Wood Mallesons’ London Office

Oholmes_sn 23 June 2016, the UK will hold a referendum on its continued membership in the European Union (EU).The result will have significant implications for both UK businesses and businesses operating in the UK.

UK business leaders – alongside politicians – have been fiercely debating their ‘Stay’ or ‘Leave’ positions. In this article we explore one of the key arguments of the ‘Leave’ campaign (Brexit), namely that Brexit will be good for businesses because it will reduce red tape regulation.

Brexit may not reduce red tape to the benefit of businesses

In addition to the official Leave Campaign, there are a number of independent campaigns calling for Brexit, including Business for Britain which argues that:

“Free from unnecessary, restrictive and financially punitive regulation, able to make our own trade arrangements and to better invest our wasted EU “tax”, Britain will be the best place in the world to do business.”
Continue Reading Busting the brexit myths

By Juliette Huard-Bourgois and Swati Tripathi, King & Wood Mallesons’ London Office

The conduct of international arbitration proceedings, from enforcement of arbitration agreements to enforcement of arbitral awards, sometimes involves actions before the courts. In the European Union (EU), international arbitration has to co-exist, not only with national procedural law in each jurisdiction, but also with EU procedural law, which harmonises jurisdiction and enforcement rules amongst the EU states.

EU procedural harmonisation is orchestrated through the application by each EU State of Council Regulation (EC) 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (hereafter the “Brussels Regulation”). The objective of the Brussels Regulation is the creation of an EU area of justice, where parallel court proceedings are prevented and judicial decisions can circulate easily.
Continue Reading Recast Brussels Regulation: a Brighter Future for Arbitration in the EU