- 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
In a judgment obtained last week, PCB obtained orders committing a defendant to prison.
The background is PCB is acting for the claimant, VTB Bank, against a Russian businessman, Pavel Skurikhin. VTB Bank has been taking steps to enforce Russian judgments obtained by it against Mr Skurikhin against assets in this jurisdiction. VTB Bank had previously succeeded in having the Russian judgments recognised in England and obtained freezing orders against Mr Skurikhin. Last Friday, VTB obtained orders from the English Court to commit Mr Skurikhin to prison for 12 months for his failure to comply with court orders in relation to his disclosure of assets and a sentence of 4 months for his failure to attend an oral examination of his assets. The sentence of 4 months was suspended to enable Mr Skurikhin to attend Court at a subsequent hearing and provide the required disclosure as to his assets.
The case highlights the fact that where there is a real risk that assets will be dissipated to prevent the enforcement of a client’s rights, the Courts will not only make orders to seek to preserve those assets but will have no hesitation in committing the defaulting party to prison should he breach or procure the breach of those orders. (from FraudNet member for United Kingdom Anthony Riem of ||PCB Litigation LLP, London||)
- Details
On November 25, 2014, the recently adopted Law “On Introduction of Changes to Certain Legal Acts of Ukraine Related to Determination of Ultimate Beneficiaries of Legal Entities and Public Figures” (the “Beneficiaries Law”) will come into force.
These amendments result in two substantial novelties:
1) Ukrainian companies (including newly established and already existing) will have to disclose their beneficiaries; and 2) information about rights to immovable property will become public. Further information can be found in the article here. (From FraudNet member for ||Ukraine||, ||Serhii Sviriba|| of ||Egorov, Puginsky, Afanasiev & Partners (EPA&P Ukraine), Kiev||).
- Details
India's new Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, has delivered a bold statement of intent directed against India's tax evaders. In one of his first acts as India's new premier, he has made the recovery of billions of dollars transferred into overseas accounts for the purpose of evading tax a top priority for his administration. One calculation puts the figure as high as $2 trillion.
Modi has set up an investigative task force of former judges and current regulators to trace, track and repatriate assets sent abroad. This move follows similar moves in recent years by the UK and USA to close the net on individuals and corporates illegally moving funds overseas. In 2011, the South Asian continent ranked third in the world behind only China and Russia in respect to the illegal movement of money abroad according to a 2013 report by Global Financial Integrity.
It is as yet unclear which methods the Indian government will deploy to seek the return of assets hidden overseas. There is a well-established principle of English law that the English courts will not involve themselves in the enforcement of another sovereign state's revenue law. However, to the extent that India's investigations give rise to claims that are not tax claims per se, but are instead civil or criminal claims of a different character, the English Courts are well placed to assist the Indian state in its legal processes. Provisions under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (External Requests and Orders) Order 2005, and s.25 of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgment Act 1982 grant the English Court dynamic powers to assist overseas claimants with civil or criminal asset recovery procedures. Moreover, the willingness of the English Court to assist overseas governments was emphasised in the recent case of United States v Abacha [2014] EWHC 993 (Comm), which highlighted the importance of international judicial cooperation in the fight against fraud. (from FraudNet member for United Kingdom ||Steven Philippsohn|| of ||PCB Litigation LLP, London||)
- Details
The Solicitor General, Oliver Heald QC, is planning on hosting a meeting across the Government to discuss possible amendments to the Bribery Act 2010 (“the Act”). Amongst the amendments likely to be discussed includes a proposal by David Green, the head of the Serious Fraud Office, to extend the ambit of section 7 of the Act, so that corporate liability to prevent acts of employees is increased to cover “financial crime” generally, not just bribery, as is currently the case.
Such an amendment would extend the scope of the SFO’s powers to impose US style fines on businesses that do not have adequate systems and procedures in place to prevent financial crime being perpetrated by their employees. In February 2014, in an interview with the Daily Telegraph, Mr Green was cautious to say that the power would be used only in “exceptional cases”, for example where a company had made a profit from the criminal behaviour of its employees, a position that seems to take aim at organisations such as banks which may well have become culpable in the wake of the Libor rigging scandal had such legislation been in place at the time. It is also envisaged that the proposed amendment could prevent firms convicted under the revised Act from bidding for public contracts under EU procurement rules, which could be both a commercial blow and a potential stigma against such firms.
The proposed amendments to the Act would need to be approved by Parliament, however they are likely to receive strong support from law enforcement agencies and consumer groups. If such proposals are passed, it will be even more incumbent on senior management to understand their obligations to prevent fraud within their own organisations and to implement rigorous systems to prevent, monitor and report such activity. (from FraudNet member for United Kingdom ||Steven Philippsohn|| of ||PCB Litigation LLP, London||)
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