Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Business Crimes Hotline

By ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
April 27, 2011

LONDON, UK

First Business Fined Under UK Corporate Manslaughter Act

The UK Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act of 2007 provides corporate liability for any death caused by senior management's gross breach of the duty of care. The British sentencing guidelines set no maximum penalty for the offense.

UK law firm Mills & Reeve reported that Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings Ltd. was informed it would be fined approximately $630,000 for a violation of the Act, which it could pay over the course of 10 years as a result of its financial limitations.

The conviction arose from the September 2008 death of a geologist who was working in a trial pit when it caved in on him. A jury had determined that the Cotswold standards for maintaining the pits were “extremely irresponsible and dangerous.”

NEW JERSEY

Developer Sentenced to 41 Months for Role in NJ Corruption Sting

Moshe Altman, a real estate developer from Monsey, NY, was sentenced on March 31 to serve a 41-month prison sentence. Altman had previously pleaded guilty to extortion and money laundering, This time, the government alleged . The government alleged that he laundered $100,000 of proceeds from illegal businesses for a government informant and arranged a $20,000 bribe to a Jersey City official. The government's sting had focused on both public corruption and money laundering. Altman's involvement served as the connection between the two.

More than half of the 40 individuals arrested in July 2009 at the culmination of the sting have pleaded guilty.

Middleman in Insider Trading Scheme Pleads Guilty

Kenneth Robinson, a Long Beach, NY, mortgage loan originator, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy and two counts of securities fraud for his role in an ever-growing insider trading scheme.

Robinson admitted that he passed information regarding at least 15 deals from an Oakton, VA, corporate lawyer, Matthew Kluger, to Garrett Bauer, a New York stock trader. After completion of the deals, Robinson also delivered the cash profits from Bauer to Kluger. Robinson provided an opening for investigators when he used some of the information to make his own trades.

Kluger appears to have drawn information from a number of law firms where he was employed, including Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom; Cravath, Swaine & Moore; Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati; and Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson.

Kluger and Bauer are both in custody and charged with securities fraud, conspiracy, and obstruction of justice, charges based in part on information obtained through the cooperation of Robinson. The latter's cooperation included agreeing to have his conversations with Kluger and Bauer recorded. The government has indicated that it anticipates the scope of the fraud to increase as the investigation progresses.

Robinson will be sentenced on July 26, 2011. He faces up to 45 years in prison and fines of over $10 million.

TEXAS

JGC Corporation Pays $218.8 Million to Resolve Bribery Charges

JGC Corporation, a Japanese construction company, entered into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) with the DOJ to resolve allegations that it was involved in a long-running conspiracy to bribe Nigerian officials.

The case arose out of an alleged scheme to obtain contracts valued at $6 billion to develop the Bonny Island liquefied natural gas project. JGC is not the first to pay large sums to resolve charges related to Bonny Island. Previously, Kellogg, Brown & Root, LLC, Technip SA, and Snamprogetti Netherlands BV resolved similar charges based on their roles, along with JGC, in a joint venture.

JGC will pay a criminal penalty of $218.8 million. The DPA will last for two years, during which time JGC will improve its compliance program and retain a qualified monitor.


Business Crimes Hotline and In the Courts were written by Associate Editor Kenneth S. Clark and Matthew J. Alexander, respectively. Both are associates at Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Washington, DC.

LONDON, UK

First Business Fined Under UK Corporate Manslaughter Act

The UK Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act of 2007 provides corporate liability for any death caused by senior management's gross breach of the duty of care. The British sentencing guidelines set no maximum penalty for the offense.

UK law firm Mills & Reeve reported that Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings Ltd. was informed it would be fined approximately $630,000 for a violation of the Act, which it could pay over the course of 10 years as a result of its financial limitations.

The conviction arose from the September 2008 death of a geologist who was working in a trial pit when it caved in on him. A jury had determined that the Cotswold standards for maintaining the pits were “extremely irresponsible and dangerous.”

NEW JERSEY

Developer Sentenced to 41 Months for Role in NJ Corruption Sting

Moshe Altman, a real estate developer from Monsey, NY, was sentenced on March 31 to serve a 41-month prison sentence. Altman had previously pleaded guilty to extortion and money laundering, This time, the government alleged . The government alleged that he laundered $100,000 of proceeds from illegal businesses for a government informant and arranged a $20,000 bribe to a Jersey City official. The government's sting had focused on both public corruption and money laundering. Altman's involvement served as the connection between the two.

More than half of the 40 individuals arrested in July 2009 at the culmination of the sting have pleaded guilty.

Middleman in Insider Trading Scheme Pleads Guilty

Kenneth Robinson, a Long Beach, NY, mortgage loan originator, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy and two counts of securities fraud for his role in an ever-growing insider trading scheme.

Robinson admitted that he passed information regarding at least 15 deals from an Oakton, VA, corporate lawyer, Matthew Kluger, to Garrett Bauer, a New York stock trader. After completion of the deals, Robinson also delivered the cash profits from Bauer to Kluger. Robinson provided an opening for investigators when he used some of the information to make his own trades.

Kluger appears to have drawn information from a number of law firms where he was employed, including Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom; Cravath, Swaine & Moore; Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati; and Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson.

Kluger and Bauer are both in custody and charged with securities fraud, conspiracy, and obstruction of justice, charges based in part on information obtained through the cooperation of Robinson. The latter's cooperation included agreeing to have his conversations with Kluger and Bauer recorded. The government has indicated that it anticipates the scope of the fraud to increase as the investigation progresses.

Robinson will be sentenced on July 26, 2011. He faces up to 45 years in prison and fines of over $10 million.

TEXAS

JGC Corporation Pays $218.8 Million to Resolve Bribery Charges

JGC Corporation, a Japanese construction company, entered into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) with the DOJ to resolve allegations that it was involved in a long-running conspiracy to bribe Nigerian officials.

The case arose out of an alleged scheme to obtain contracts valued at $6 billion to develop the Bonny Island liquefied natural gas project. JGC is not the first to pay large sums to resolve charges related to Bonny Island. Previously, Kellogg, Brown & Root, LLC, Technip SA, and Snamprogetti Netherlands BV resolved similar charges based on their roles, along with JGC, in a joint venture.

JGC will pay a criminal penalty of $218.8 million. The DPA will last for two years, during which time JGC will improve its compliance program and retain a qualified monitor.


Business Crimes Hotline and In the Courts were written by Associate Editor Kenneth S. Clark and Matthew J. Alexander, respectively. Both are associates at Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Washington, DC.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.

The Stranger to the Deed Rule Image

In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.