- Maritime Piracy
- TalkFraud
- Membership
- Investigation
- Products & Services
The IMB aware of the escalating level of this criminal activity, wanted to provide a free service to the seafarer and established the 24 hour IMB Piracy Reporting Centre (PRC) in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
A newsletter about fraud and global asset recovery from the office of International Chamber of Commerce's FraudNet. To read about key asset recovery cases and global compliance with anti-fraud and money-laundering laws, please click in the link above for the Newsletter PDF.
CCS offers a flexible membership arrangement based on the selection of predetermined membership packages. A prospective member can elect to join one or more Bureaux according to their requirements.
Losses due to official misconduct account for a great many maritime trade incidents. Each incident can be complex and wide-ranging in nature. It is therefore unlikely that any one company will have the knowledge and resources to be able to investigate it thoroughly.
Counterfeiting and piracy are a drain on our businesses and on the global economy. It has resulted in the widespread loss of lawful employment and a massive reduction of tax revenues.
- Details
FraudNet member for United Kingdom, Steven Philippsohn, of PCB Litigation LLP, London.
We would like to thank our clients, referees, fellow professionals and others who have provided their support over the years in helping us top the rankings for civil fraud in both Chambers and Partners and The Legal 500. PCB received a Band 1 ranking for civil fraud in the UK in Chambers and Partners for the first time, while retaining its tier 1 position for civil fraud in London in The Legal 500.
According to Chambers and Partners, the firm assists “high-end clients including banks and corporations in getting to the bottom of sophisticated fraud scenarios. Skilled at obtaining global interim relief and at dealing with jurisdictional issues that arise.”
In The Legal 500, PCB is quoted as being perhaps “the pre-eminent boutique” in London’s civil fraud arena.
Steven Philippsohn, senior partner, PCB Litigation, said:
“This is the culmination of many years of hard work and is a testament to the capabilities of a dedicated and talented team, supplemented by high quality barristers, foreign lawyers and other professionals with whom we regularly work. We have also been fortunate to have had some fantastic clients, many of whom have been willing to risk pushing at the legal boundaries in seeking to achieve successful outcomes.
“We continue to strive to provide innovative solutions and excellence in tackling complex fraud and asset recovery cases. The most recent development has been the obtaining this year of what is believed to be the first ever search order granted against a respondent without the need to have a claim against that party.”
About PCB Litigation:
PCB Litigation is based in the heart of Legal London but operates globally in complex dispute resolution matters. Renowned for its expertise in fraud and asset recovery, it is also regularly instructed on commercial litigation and international arbitration cases.
- Details
FraudNet member for United Kingdom, Steven Philippsohn, of PCB Litigation, on Panama papers.
Click here to view full article.
- Details
FraudNet member for British Virgin Islands, Martin S Kenney, of Martin Kenney & Co, Road Town talks on Panama papers.
Click here to view full article.
- Details
FraudNet member for Ukraine, Egorov, Puginsky, Afanasiev & Partners (EPA&P Ukraine), Kiev gives an expert opinion on Ukraine signing the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements.
On 21 March 2016, Ukraine signed the Hague Convention of 30 June 2005 on Choice of Court Agreements (“Convention”). This is a major step towards integration of Ukraine into European and global trade and investment environment. Availability of choice of court agreements in Ukraine will ensure yet another instrument of legal protection for businesses engaging in trade with Ukrainian parties or investing into the country.
Currently, under Ukrainian law, businesses in Ukraine can freely enter into arbitration agreements if they do not feel that Ukrainian courts are appropriate forum for resolution of commercial disputes. Arbitral awards are enforceable in Ukraine and globally. The parties’ rights to subject their disputes to jurisdiction of foreign courts, and enforceability of such courts’ judgments, however, are largely restricted to instances when relevant treaties that Ukraine has with a handful of other countries expressly permit it. The reciprocity principle similarly failed to provide a reliable basis for enforcement of foreign judgments in the 12 years since its introduction.
The Convention resolves this imbalance by introducing a mechanism that is similar to arbitration agreements for the purposes of the choice of court. Parties to a contract that has an international dimension will be able to conclude an agreement pre-determining the courts that will exclusively hear future disputes under the contract the parties can designate the courts of a certain country, or even a specific court. The courts not chosen contractually will generally be required to stay or terminate the proceedings and refer the dispute to a forum that was agreed between the parties.
Such exclusive choice of court agreements can be concluded in civil and commercial matters; however, the Convention does not cover consumer and employment contracts, family law, antitrust and insolvency matters, torts, validity of intellectual property rights and a range of other areas.
The Convention provides only for narrow exceptions when such an agreement can be disregarded – for instance, when it is null and void, the parties lacked capacity to conclude it, if it is unenforceable or violates public policy of a relevant state.
Importantly, the Convention also expressly facilitates enforcement of foreign judgments given by a court designated in such an exclusive choice of court agreement.
Currently, 27 states across Europe, as well as the European Union and Mexico are parties to the Convention. The United States of America and Singapore have signed, but not yet ratified it. If Ukraine ratifies the Convention, it will enter into force on the first day of the month following the expiration of three months after the deposit of its instrument of ratification.
A number of legal and practical adjustments will have to be undertaken in terms of legislation and court practice to ensure smooth application of the Convention in Ukraine, but it will bring benefit to the legal system from Day 1.
Click here to view original article.
Contact
Contact
© Commercial Crime Services, a division of the ICC Company limited by guarantee registered in England No 05716642 Registered office Cinnabar Wharf, 26 Wapping High Street LONDON E1W 1NG Tel: +44 (0)20 7423 6960 E-mail us your comments and remarks