Passporting notification: what the decision maker looks at
A passporting notification is checked for completeness, consistency and identity. The receiving authority confirms that the file matches the licence already on record, that the described activity fits the scope of that licence, and that the required annexes are present. It does not re-open the original authorisation decision. It closes a file it must be able to transmit without gaps.
What decision maker checks first
Before anything else, the file is matched against the register entry of the notifying entity. Name, legal form, licence status and scope of permitted activity have to align exactly. A mismatch at this stage — a trading name that differs from the register, an activity described more broadly than the licence allows — stops the file before it reaches substantive review.
Once identity is confirmed, the reviewer moves to structure: is the intended host-state activity the same activity covered at home, or does it require an additional step first. A notification cannot expand a licence. It can only extend where the entity is already authorised to operate.
What changes once the file moves
Submission itself does not change anything for the applicant. The practical shift happens at two later points: when the home authority forwards the file, and when the notified activity becomes effective in the host state. Between these two points the applicant is in a waiting phase with limited ability to amend the file without restarting parts of it.
After the effective date, obligations under host-state supervision start to apply alongside home-state ones. This is the point most files treat as routine and most disputes later treat as decisive: once the file has moved, withdrawing it is not the same as never having filed it.
| Stage | Who acts | Typical output |
|---|---|---|
| File preparation | Applicant | Completed notification file with required annexes |
| Completeness check | Home authority | Acknowledgement of receipt or request for correction |
| Transmission | Home authority | File forwarded to the host authority |
| Review window | Host authority | No objection, or a request for clarification |
| Effective date | Set by procedure | Activity may lawfully start in the host state |
What to do to prepare the file
Assemble the file the way you would prepare it for Supervisory correspondence step by step: complete on first submission, dated, and organised so that each annex answers one specific question rather than several at once.
- Confirm the exact scope of the home licence before drafting the notification.
- List every host-state activity separately; do not group distinct services under one description.
- Attach the annexes the notifying authority's own checklist requires, not a generic set.
- Assign one internal contact person for the whole review period.
- Track the acknowledgement of receipt date — later deadlines run from it, not from submission.
- Keep a copy of the file as transmitted, not only as drafted.
Who decides, and on what timeline
The home authority decides completeness and transmits the file. The host authority reviews it within a period set by its own procedural rules and either raises no objection or requests clarification. If the host authority does not respond within that period, the file typically becomes effective by the passage of time itself, not by an explicit approval letter.
This is why tracking dates matters more here than in file types built around a single decision. Nobody signs a final approval. The file becomes effective, or it does not, depending on whether a deadline was met.
Common forks
If the home authority requests corrections before transmission, the file does not move and no deadline starts running against the host authority. Correct and resubmit; nothing is lost except time.
If the host authority raises a specific objection after transmission, the file typically returns to the applicant through the home authority rather than being rejected outright. Treat the objection as a request for a narrower or clearer description, not as a refusal.
If the applicant wants to withdraw after transmission but before the effective date, this is the point of no return in practice: withdrawal is usually possible, but it does not erase the fact that a file was transmitted, and a later notification for the same activity may be reviewed against that history. A related question — what a decision maker checks when a file is being unwound rather than opened — is covered in Withdrawal procedure step by step.
Some files raise a different kind of decision-maker logic entirely, closer to an enforcement request than a notification; for a contrast in structure, see Customs application for action step by step.
What this page does not cover
This page does not cover the underlying authorisation criteria that made the home licence possible in the first place, and it does not replace a review of the specific activity being notified. It also does not cover how other practice areas handle equivalent update cycles; for comparison, see Publication practice in ownership of results.
Where the notification concerns activity outside the entity's current licence scope, this page does not apply — that situation requires a new authorisation step, not a notification.
Reviewed
This overview reflects supervisory practice as observed in current notification files and is reviewed periodically against changes in that practice. It does not cite specific instruments; procedural detail at this level depends on the notifying and host authorities involved, and on their published forms and checklists.
Related reading
If your open question is not about notification but about withdrawing an existing authorisation, start with Withdrawal procedure step by step.
FAQ
How long does passporting notification take in practice?
There is no single fixed period. The clock has two segments: the home authority's completeness check, and the host authority's review window after transmission. Both periods are set by the notifying authority's own procedural rules and start only once the file is complete.
Which documents are needed to start?
At minimum, the file needs proof of the current licence and its scope, a description of the intended host-state activity, and the annexes required by the notifying authority's checklist. A file missing any one of these is returned before review, not reviewed with a gap.
What happens if the other side does not respond?
If the host authority does not respond within its review period, the notification typically becomes effective by the passage of time rather than by an explicit letter. Confirm the deadline in writing at transmission so silence works in your favour rather than becoming a dispute later.
If the immediate question is narrower than notification procedure — for example, on-chain royalties that are not being honoured — start here: When royalties encoded on-chain are ignored.