The SEC v Ripple Labs, Inc. case1 has attracted great interest because of its implications for the qualification of digital assets as securities and, in general, for the future of cryptos in the US, where digital assets are not regulated as such. The EU has adopted a far-reaching regulation of cryptoassets (MiCAR),2 which however, does not apply to cryptoassets that fall under the definition of financial instruments, thus leaving the question open as to the applicable regime. To compare potential outcomes had the case been heard in the EU, this article focuses on the issue of whether and under what conditions cryptoassets can be classified as financial instruments under EU law, and the legal implications of such a classification. This article further analyses the interaction between MiCAR and certain existing national regimes that attract to regulation financial products other than financial instruments. Additionally, a summary of the corresponding regulatory landscape in the UK is provided.
24 OCT 2024This article compares key aspects of the EU’s draft regulation on Markets in Cryptoassets (MiCAR) and the UK’s approach outlined in HM Treasury’s recent consultation, drawing out key similarities and differences and their implications.
1 APR 2023This article examines the safeguarding requirements for e-money institutions and payment services firms and their treatment under the UK’s depositor protection regime, which was recently updated to address the legal uncertainty resulting from the Court of Appeal’s decision in the Re Ipagoo case and highlights the likelihood of further regulatory reform in this area.
1 MAY 2023For the EU’s and UK’s securities and markets regulators nothing is in the name nor in the technology used when it comes to the need for a trading venue licence. Yet, noting some uncertainty around the application of key concepts to certain facilities, each regulator has sought to provide clarity for their respective markets via recently published guidance.
1 NOV 2023