Mr. Fullerton discusses the lack of clarity on what constitutes a whistleblower. Marketing firm Neo@Ogilvy has decided not to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court in a case that would have tested the definition of a whistleblower under the Dodd-Frank Act. At issue is whether an employee can be eligible for anti-retaliation protection under the Dodd-Frank Act even if he or she does not provide information of corporate wrongdoing directly to the SEC. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit says “no,” but the Second Circuit disagrees.
A former California State judge in an arbitration awarded nearly $1.7 million to an employer against its former employee based primarily on his acts taken going out the door. His joking email with a co-worker after recruiting three others, characterizing their resignations as “Three bullets to the back of the head” of his employer, was clearly shooting himself in the foot in the eyes of the arbitrator. The Award is interesting for many reasons – – the interplay between fiduciary duties and non-solicitation of employees provisions, the allowable damages when such a fiduciary duty is breached by co-worker solicitation, and the overriding difference of treatment of bad leavers versus good leavers.
Den 19. november 2015 blev ”den nye udbudslov” vedtaget i folketinget. Loven træder i kraft den 1. januar 2016 og finder kun anvendelse på udbud, der er iværksat efter den 1. januar 2016.
- UK businesses which transfer to or share with US companies any databases containing personal data have to comply with rules set out in the Data Protection Act to ensure that the transfer or sharing protects the individuals’ privacy rights.
- One way of doing this was a voluntary scheme set up by the US Department of Commerce called “Safe Harbor”. The EU’s highest court has now ruled that Safe Harbor is not fit for purpose and cannot be used.
- Transfers/sharing which relied on Safe Harbor therefore breach the DPA and, after 31 January 2016, further transfers risk enforcement action, including fines.
- Other compliance methods can be used instead, but these need to be put in place quickly to stay within the law.
Depending at which point of a commercial development’s chain of command you sit, you may have thought that the role of monitoring surveyor is straightforward enough. The monitoring surveyor is engaged by a party (generally a funder but also forward purchasers and tenants), and then left to get on with the job.
But, as usual, nothing is as simple as it seems. A recent case (Lloyds Bank Plc v McBains Cooper Consulting Ltd) has highlighted not only what can go wrong for a monitoring surveyor, but also the significant responsibility of the surveyor’s client.
Article 4 in our series of articles on the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954
This is part of the series of articles we have published this year regarding the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, and in particular the grounds a landlord can use to oppose an application for a lease renewal by a tenant. In this particular article, we are going to consider ground (f), which is frequently referred to as the “redevelopment ground”. As we will see, it is in fact a lot more.
In September 2015, a notice appeared in the Thai Government Gazette announcing the launch of the Multiple Entry Tourist Visa (METV). Thai Embassies are expected to start issuing such visas as of November 13, 2015.
The METV is an addition to the tourist visa. In the past, single-entry or double-entry tourist visas were most commonly issued. The METV permits the holder to travel in and out of Thailand multiple times during the 6-month validity period of the visa with duration of stay of up to 60 days per visit. The cost of an METV will be 5,000 baht. As the METV is newly implemented, please note that all Thai Embassies may not be completely familiar with this type of visa and the requirements for its issuance.
Royal Oak, Michigan, November 19, 2015: Howard & Howard Attorneys PLLC is pleased to announce that Daniel R. Chojnowski has joined the firm. He will practice out of the firm’s Royal Oak Office.
Mr. Chojnowski focuses his practice in building and maintaining intellectual property value for his clients. In particular, his practice includes global patent procurement and opinion preparation with an emphasis on patent, trademark, copyright, and trade secret law. Mr. Chojnowski also counsels clients on clearance/freedom-to-practice issues, as well as on strategies for management of their global intellectual property portfolios.
Panelists will provide insight on and best practices for litigating complex business disputes, and will address all aspects of the BLS, including proper subject matter, applying to the session, procedural orders, discovery, and dispositive motions.