Top Menu

A Look At The French Enforcement Action Against Airbus

airbus

Previous posts here and here looked at the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement action against Airbus.

This previous post looked at the U.K. Bribery Act enforcement action against Airbus.

This post completes the enforcement trilogy, bylooking at the French enforcement action against Airbus.

Like the prior U.S. and U.K. bribery enforcement action, the French enforcement action against Airbus (see here for the Judicial Public Interest Agreement) focused on the use of business partners in connection with sales or attempted sales in various countries.

Continue Reading

Six Years After Juniper Networks Disclosed FCPA Scrutiny, It Resolves A $11.7 Million Joke Of An Enforcement Action Based On Russia And China Subsidiary Conduct

junipernetworks

As highlighted in this previous post, in mid-2013 Juniper Networks disclosed that it was under FCPA scrutiny. Over six years later, the SEC announced yesterday that the company agreed to pay approximately $11.7 million to resolve the scrutiny.

As highlighted below, the enforcement action was based on the conduct of Russia and China subsidiary employees. In Russia, certain sales employees of the Russian representative office of Juniper’s subsidiary secretly agreed with third party channel partners to provide discounts to customers that were parked in off-book funds some of which were used to pay for customer trips, including trips for government officials, some of which were predominately leisure in nature. In China, certain sales employees of Juniper’s Chinese subsidiaries falsified trip and meeting agendas for customer events in seeking approval from Juniper’s Legal Department.

Based on the conduct alleged in the enforcement action (which is beyond any conceivable statute of limitations) as well as actual FCPA legal authority, the enforcement action is a $11.7 million joke.

Continue Reading

United Technologies Corp. Resolves $13.9 Million Enforcement Action

UTC

Yesterday, the SEC announced that United Technologies Corporation resolved a $13.9 million Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement action.

The conduct at issue concerned Otis Elevator Co. (a wholly-owned subsidiary of UTC), Pratt & Whitney (an operating division of UTC), and International Aero Engines (a joint venture of five aerospace companies including Pratt & Whitney) regarding a Russian and Azerbaijani improper payment scheme, a China aviation scheme, improper payments for Otis Elevator sales in China, and leisure travel for foreign officials from several countries including China, Kuwait, South Korea, Pakistan, Thailand, and Indonesia.

Continue Reading

DOJ Once Again Returns To Russia Nuclear Bribery Scheme As Transport Logistics International Resolves $2 Million Enforcement Action

TENEX

As highlighted in this prior post, in August 2015 the DOJ announced a Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and related enforcement action against Daren Condrey (an owner and executive of Maryland-based Transport Logistics International – TLI) and Vadim Mikerin (an alleged Russian “foreign official”) in connection with a nuclear industry bribery scheme.

As highlighted in this prior post, Mikerin (a Maryland resident) worked for a Maryland corporation (TENAM Corporation), but the DOJ considered him a Russian “foreign official” because TENAM was a wholly-owned subsidiary on TENEX – an entity “indirectly owned and controlled by, and performed functions of, the government of the Russian Federation.”

Continue Reading

DOJ Returns To Russia Nuclear Bribery Scheme And Announces Additional Criminal Charges

lambert

Previous posts here and here highlighted the DOJ’s 2015 Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement action concerning a Russian nuclear bribery scheme.

As highlighted in the previous posts, Daren Condrey pleaded guilty to FCPA violations for allegedly bribing Vadim Mikerin.

Mikerin was an alleged Russian “foreign official” because he worked for TENAM Corp. (a Maryland corporation) because TENAM was a wholly-owned subsidiary on TENEX – an entity “indirectly owned and controlled by, and performed functions of, the government of the [Russian government].”

Continue Reading

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes