knowledge 6 August 2026 |

Prohibition Notices: Central Bank of Ireland Publishes Supplemental Guidance

The Supplemental Guidance came into force on the same day that it was published (30 July 2026).

This follows the CBI’s January 2026 consultation (CP166) on the draft Supplemental Guidance The CBI has also published a Feedback Statement summarising the eight responses it received, noting certain adjustments to what was originally proposed in CP166, and giving some additional clarifications.  

For more information on CP166 and the Supplemental Guidance, read our earlier briefing here: CBI’s Focus on Fitness and Probity Continues with Consultation on Prohibition Notices. 

In terms of where the Supplemental Guidance sits within the CBI’s F&P Framework, it supplements the ‘Decision’ section of the CBI’s Guidance on Fitness and Probity Investigations, Suspensions and Prohibitions (the “Main Guidance”). The new Supplemental Guidance will eventually be subsumed into the Main Guidance, but that Main Guidance remains under review by the CBI (including in light of the High Court’s March 2026 findings in Central Bank of Ireland v CD on the CBI’s F&P enforcement procedures). The CBI separately announced, on 22 July 2026, an independent review (by Josephine Feehily, former Chair of the Revenue Commissioners and first Chair of the Policing Authority) of its enforcement activities, including its decision-making processes.

This briefing focuses on what’s changed between the draft Supplemental Guidance that formed part of CP166, and the final form Supplemental Guidance that now applies.

WHAT’S CHANGED FOLLOWING CP166?

Following its review of submissions received in response to CP166, the CBI made some targeted amendments to the final Supplemental Guidance. These are particularly focused on the publication of prohibition notices, and include the following:

• It reiterated that the obligation to comply with a prohibition notice extends to the conditions set out in that notice and may be enforced accordingly.
• It clarified that, when considering whether to impose a prohibition, the CBI must be satisfied that the individual and any relevant entities concerned have been given any necessary hearing in relation to the proposed issue of the prohibition notice.
• It clarified that if the CBI is leaning towards issuing a prohibition notice (the final decision rests with the Governor), the CBI will give the individual and any relevant entities the chance to make submissions in relation to the proposed issue of that notice.
• It clarified that submissions will also be invited before a decision is made on whether to publish a prohibition notice (the individual and any relevant entity will receive written correspondence in relation to the proposed publication). Submissions on matters including the individual’s personal circumstances and privacy may be considered before a publication decision is made.

Some notable clarifications included in the Feedback Statement include:

• While there isn’t a cut-off period beyond which an individual’s record is no longer relevant, the CBI will exercise judgment on a case-by-case basis and may take the passage of time into account.
• That firms aren’t expected to undertake a special or enhanced due diligence process simply because an individual was previously subject to a prohibition. However, firms must consider the fact that an individual had a previous prohibition when assessing whether that individual satisfies the applicable F&P standards.
• The CBI doesn’t intend to establish a public register of approved and prohibited persons. However, it noted that prohibition-related statements are published where appropriate and may assist firms in performing due diligence. To date, the CBI has published statements relating to 12 prohibition notices, including both current and expired cases.
• On timelines, the CBI noted that (based on previous cases) it takes approximately 20 months from the date that a decision is made to carry out an investigation to the date of a prohibition decision (subject to variables which may extend that timeframe, such as complexity, volume of documentation, and level of cooperation).
• The CBI also confirmed that, when preparing its next Annual Report, it will look at whether to publish statistics on F&P investigation actions taken by it.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

For regulated firms, the Supplemental Guidance provides a clearer framework for understanding how prohibition decisions are likely to be approached and the factors that may influence outcomes. The guidance may also assist firms when assessing prospective appointments.

For individuals performing controlled function (CF) and pre-approval controlled function (PCF) roles, the Supplemental Guidance offers greater transparency regarding the circumstances that may be considered in prohibition decisions, including evidence of remediation, cooperation and insight. It also provides additional clarity regarding the potential publication of prohibition notices and the considerations that may influence those decisions.