Monthly Archives: December 2016

In First Speech since the Election, DOJ Deputy Attorney General, Sally Yates, “Optimistic” that Corporate Misconduct Will Remain a DOJ Priority under New Administration

As many pundits speculate regarding the future of the Yates Memo[1] in a Trump administration, on Wednesday, November 30, 2016, Department of Justice (“DOJ”) Deputy Attorney General, Sally Q. Yates, provided her first comments since the election.  The namesake of the well-known, “Yates Memo,” Yates spoke at the 33rd Annual International Conference on Foreign Corrupt Practices Act in Washington, D.C. and provided her perspective on the future of DOJ’s current focus on individual misconduct.

Yates, who has served at the DOJ for over twenty-seven years, stated that while the DOJ has endured many transitions in leadership during her tenure, the ideology of the DOJ with respect to general deterrence as well as enforcement of corporate misconduct has remained unchanged. Thus, Yates predicted that the incoming administration under President-elect Donald Trump will maintain the DOJ’s current commitment to pursing potential individuals while combating alleged cases of corporate fraud and wrongdoing, proclaiming:

Read full article

List of Holiday-Related Trade Secret/Non-Compete Cases

trgvhbsuf40-srikanta-h-uWhether you are a young child missing teeth, or a grown-up taking account of her life, or Santa Claus himself checking up on everyone else’s life, many of us make lists at holiday time.  They can be lists of gifts we want, or those we need to get, or people we wish to see or write to, or things we need or want to do before the end of the year.  Sometimes they are just lists of things that happened this year or that we want to happen next year.  Certainly there are lots of “Top Ten” holiday lists.  This one may be neither an exception nor exceptional, but here is a “Top Ten List of Holiday-Related Trade Secret/Non-Compete Cases”:

Read full article

Talking Tax – Issue 61

Cases

Commissioner of Taxation v Kamal Jayasinghe [2016] HCA 275

The High Court has granted special leave to appeal the Full Federal Court decision in Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Jayasinghe [2016] FCAFC 79.

The Commissioner lost both cases, at first instance at the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, and on appeal to the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia, where it was held that the taxpayer was exempt from his earnings on the basis that he was the holder of an office in the United Nations.

The case addressed the interpretation of the phrase:

  • ‘a person who holds an office in an international organisation’ under section 6(1)(d) of the Interpretational Organisations (Privileges and Immunities) Act 1963 (Cth) (IOPI Act) and
  • ‘a person who holds an office in the United Nations’ under regulation 10 of the United Nations (Privileges and Immunities) Regulations 1986 (Cth).

The particular issue in dispute on appeal was whether the interpretation of the phrases was informed by the meaning of the Convention to which the IOPI Act gives effect. The IOPI Act was enacted in part to give effect to the UN Convention stating that officials of the United Nations were to be exempt from taxation on the salaries and emoluments paid by the United Nations.

The majority of the Federal Court (Justice Pagone and Justice Davies) held that, as a Project Manager, the taxpayer was the holder of an office in the UN, an international organisation, meaning that he was entitled to the tax exemption. Chief Justice Allsop dissented on appeal.

The High Court granted special leave to appeal the decision.

Read full article

Pravo.ru – 300: Lidings Among TOP-3 Russia’s Best Law Firms in Terms of Revenue Per Lawyer Taking Leading Positions in Key Practice Areas and Financial Performance

Pravo.ru – 300: Lidings Among TOP-3 Russia’s Best Law Firms in Terms of Revenue Per Lawyer Taking Leading Positions in Key Practice Areas and Financial Performance

Read full article
ILN Today Post

Non-possessory pledge

Authors: Antonello Corrado, Giovanna Canale, Silvia Viceconte

On May 3, 2016, the Decree Law 3 May 2016, no. 59, containing “Urgent provisions on enforcement and bankruptcy proceedings in favor of investors in banks in liquidation”, entered into force and introduced a new form of credit guarantee, the so-called non-possessory pledge.

This Decree was converted into Law no. 119 of 30 June 2016 and published in the Official Gazette no. 153 on July 2, 2016.

Article 1 of Decree Law no. 59/2016 stipulates that “Entrepreneurs registered in the Business Register may place a non-possessory pledge in order to guarantee the credits granted to them or to thirds, whether current or future, determined or determinable and with a forecasted maximum guaranteed amount, relating to the business activity of the enterprise”.

Read full article
ILN Today Post

Loan agreements secured by real estate assets. The latest developments for entrepreneurs and consumers.

Recently, new provisions favorable to banks or other entities authorized to grant credit to the public have been introduced into our judicial system, implementing the so-called Consolidated Banking Act (Legislative Decree 1 September 1993, no. 385) so as to provide the creditor with the most effective instruments for recovering the funds granted to the borrower, being either entrepreneur or consumer.

Authors:
Antonello Corrado
Silvia Viceconte
Giovanna Canale

Such procedures, profoundly different from one another by derivation and content, contained in two separate law provisions, pursue the common purpose of offering creditors alternative measures to the lengthy litigation procedures of real estate enforcement, with the main objective of resolving the problem of loan defaults and the relative effects on the resulting ability to grant the credits.

«Corporate financing secured by transferring real estate, subject to conditions precedent» – new art. 48bis of the Consolidated Banking Act.

Art. 2 of Law Decree 3 May 2016, no. 59, in force since last May 4 and recently converted into Law 30 June 2016 no. 119, introduced the possibility to include in the loan agreements signed between bank and entrepreneur a transfer clause of the ownership of an immovable property or other rights in rem, in favor of the creditor or of the company controlled or connected to the same, conditioned to default of the debtor.

Said clause can be included in future loan agreements as well as on agreements existing at the date in which the provision in question was enforced, by modifying the contract terms through a notarial deed.

Read full article
ILN Today Post

Information Report. Equitalia’s tax bills resolution

The conversion Law no. 225/2016 of the Legislative Decree October 22, 2016, no. 1931 entitled “Urgent measures on taxation and for the financing of non deferrable needs” regulates, under article 6, the simplified resolution of the loads entrusted to the tax collection agent from 2000 to 2016.

Subjective scope of applicability of the regulation

All taxpayers (individuals, companies, sole traders and professionals) who have received a payment load entrusted to the tax collection agent from 2000 to 2016 can make use of the provision in question.
The regulation provides that debtors can pay off their indebtedness net of penalties and late payment interest, granting them the opportunity to pay only the sums entrusted to the tax collection agent by way of capital, interest, collection charges (to be calculated, as a result of sanctions reductions, only on capital and interest accrued from the delayed registration), any reimbursement of expenses incurred for enforcement proceedings, as well as any reimbursement of expenses for payment notices.
The resolution can also be exercised by debtors who have already partially paid, also as a result of the deferral orders issued by the agent, the amounts due provided that, with respect to the installment plans in place, all payments expiring from October 1 to December 31, 2016 have been made.

Read full article

Law Firms: The Future is NOW

iStock_000011353685_LargeThe “law firm of the future.”

We’ve spent a lot of time talking about this in recent months, not because I find it to be interesting (which I do), but because other than my “Instagram for Lawyers” post, this has been the hottest topic on Zen this year. I had a conversation with a senior partner at a law firm last week, who asked me “How do we communicate to people that the future is NOW?” His firm has been embracing these “futuristic” policies for a number of years, and recognizes that change in the industry is not happening fast enough.

In May, Altman Weil published the 8th edition of their “Law Firms in Transition” survey, which polls the managing partners and chairs at 800 US law firms with 50 or more lawyers (this year’s survey received 356 respondents from 49% of the 350 largest US law firms). If you haven’t already read at least the executive summary for this survey, I highly encourage you to take a look through it. In the midst of the second quarter of this year, Altman Weil said:

Are law firms still in transition in 2016? We think so, although the pace of change can seem modest. Despite pockets of true innovation, most firms are choosing to proceed with lawyerly caution in the midst of a market that is being reinvented around them.”

Read full article

Information Report. Equitalia’s tax bills resolution

Circolare informativa. “Definizione ruoli Equitalia”
  • The conversion Law no. 225/2016 of the Legislative Decree October 22, 2016, no. 1931 entitled “Urgent measures on taxation and for the financing of non deferrable needs” regulates, under article 6, the simplified resolution of the loads entrusted to the tax collection agent from 2000 to 2016.

    Simone Maria D’Arcangelo

    Subjective scope of applicability of the regulation

    All taxpayers (individuals, companies, sole traders and professionals) who have received a payment load entrusted to the tax collection agent from 2000 to 2016 can make use of the provision in question.
    The regulation provides that debtors can pay off their indebtedness net of penalties and late payment interest, granting them the opportunity to pay only the sums entrusted to the tax collection agent by way of capital, interest, collection charges (to be calculated, as a result of sanctions reductions, only on capital and interest accrued from the delayed registration), any reimbursement of expenses incurred for enforcement proceedings, as well as any reimbursement of expenses for payment notices.
    The resolution can also be exercised by debtors who have already partially paid, also as a result of the deferral orders issued by the agent, the amounts due provided that, with respect to the installment plans in place, all payments expiring from October 1 to December 31, 2016 have been made.

Read full article

New Laws Impacting Illinois Employers in 2016 and Beyond

E. Jason Tremblay

E. Jason Tremblay

While Illinois appears to be in legislative gridlock on a wide variety of political and legislative fronts, it has become abundantly clear that such gridlock has not curtailed the passage of employment and labor-related legislation in Illinois. The following are highlights of seven new laws impacting Illinois employers in 2016 and beyond.

  1. Paid Sick Leave In Chicago and Cook County
    Effective July 1, 2017, employers who have at least one (1) employee in Chicago or Cook County are obligated to provide paid sick leave for those employees who work at least 80 hours within any 120-day period, provided they work at least 2 hours in any 2-week period within Chicago or Cook County. Specifically, covered employers are required to offer 1 hour of paid sick time for every 40 hours worked, which can be capped at 5 paid sick days each year unless the employer sets a higher limit. Up to 20 hours of accrued but unused sick leave may also be carried over into the next 12-month period. Sick leave can be used for the employee’s own illness or the illness of or medical treatment for the employee’s family member (which is broadly defined
  2. The Illinois Employee Sick Leave Act
    Effective January 1, 2017, Illinois employers that currently provide sick leave benefits to their employees must allow the employees to use their personal sick leave benefits for absences due to the illness, injuries, or medical appointments of their family members. In short, employers cannot limit sick leave to just the employee’s sickness. This law does not require employers (outside the city of Chicago or Cook County) to offer sick leave benefits; however, if they do provide sick leave benefits, employees must be allowed to take such leave for any illnesses or other sickness-related matters of their family members. “Family members” are defined broadly under the Act and include immediate family, parents-in-law, grandchildren, grandparents, or step parents.
Read full article