Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
Related Content
CASE STUDY

“The forms and precedents section is essential so that I can quickly and easily look up provisions to include in templates or bespoke project contracts.”

RWE

Access all documents on Dirty fees

Dirty fees meaning

What does Dirty fees mean?
Dirty fees describes fund or mandate charges where, beyond the headline management fee, additional costs are layered in or bundled without clear, itemised disclosure. Typical add‑ons include custody and depositary fees, administration and platform charges, foreign exchange spreads, overseas transaction charges, brokerage and settlement costs, data and research, and other “fund expenses”. This is a descriptive market term, not defined in legislation or case law. Its legal relevance is transparency and allocation of costs. In the UK (England & Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland), FCA rules (including COBS costs and charges, inducements, best interests and the Consumer Duty) require clear ex‑ante and ex‑post disclosure and fair presentation of all charges. In Ireland, equivalent obligations arise under MiFID II, UCITS/AIFMD and Central Bank of Ireland requirements. Usage and concerns are broadly consistent across these jurisdictions. Practically, lawyers should scrutinise investment management agreements, fund limited partnership agreements, prospectuses and side letters to define what the management fee covers versus pass‑through expenses; guard against double‑charging, mark‑ups and vague “other expenses”; and consider “all‑in” fees, caps, exclusions and MFN protections. For fiduciaries (e.g. trustees), diligence on overseas transaction surcharges and custody costs is particularly important.
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

View the related News about Dirty fees

NEWS
UK to extend costs protection beyond UWOs to High Court POCA civil recovery; effect on enforcement against kleptocrats remains uncertain

UK moves to protect prosecutors from deep-pocketed individuals in suspected dirty-money cases could see enforcers becoming braver in taking on Kleptocrats Moves in the UK to shield prosecutors from the resources of well-heeled suspects in alleged dirty-money matters may embolden enforcers to tackle Kleptocrats more boldly. Yet, past experience indicates a surge of fresh actions remains improbable. The government stated last month that it sees value in bringing in ‘costs protection’ for agencies pursuing the recovery of criminal proceeds through civil routes. The plan follows anxieties that public bodies have been hamstrung in confronting affluent figures tied to suspected illicit funds, owing to the risk that civil courts might oblige them to shoulder substantial legal fees. Authorities have already received similar safeguards when deploying Unexplained Wealth Orders (UWOs), after the National Crime Agency (NCA) was hit with £1.5m in costs when it lost a court battle in 2020. Even so, a flood of filings still appears unlikely...

Read More Right Arrow