IFLR is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Search results for

There are 25,965 results that match your search.25,965 results
  • Thomas Sando One of the changes to the Norwegian Competition Act (the Act) that entered into force on January 1 2014 was the amendments to the leniency scheme available for cartel participants considering blowing the whistle to the Norwegian Competition Authority (the NCA). Under the previous scheme, the conditions for obtaining leniency were hidden in the Leniency Regulation. From January 1, the conditions are included in the new sections 30 and 31 of the Act, dealing with complete and partial leniency respectively. Besides the relocation of the conditions for obtaining leniency, the amended scheme introduces a marker system in line with the system in the EU. This is an improvement, as it will be possible for leniency applicants to initially bring only limited information, yet receive leniency rights from the time of the initial application.
  • Tomasz Konopka Borys D Sawicki Ms X, an accountant at company A, domiciled in country B, receives a phone call. Someone on the other side of the line explains that he is calling her in connection with a new project run by company A in which her assistance will be required. Shortly after, Ms X receives an e-mail from a top level manager of company A (whom she has never met personally), Mr Z, referring to that call and repeating the message. Mr Z explains the relevance of the project to company A and stresses the importance of Ms X's involvement for its success. He also requests Ms X to keep the matter secret and to work on the assignment solely with him. Ms X feels honoured. Not long after the call, Ms X receives her first task in the project: she has to wire €450,000 ($613,000) from company A's bank account to an account of a company (unknown to her) in Country C. The following days bring several similar requests; Ms X wires the monies and Mr Z praises her assistance and encourages her to continue, as the project is about to be successfully completed. But before the successful completion arrives, Ms X's direct superior finally notices the transfers from the bank account of company A and demands explanations. A few hours later, it is clear that Mr Z (the real one) has never contacted Ms X nor instructed her to make any money transfer. At which time, however, the monies are already in a bank account in country C. The story is neither unrealistic nor exceptional – frauds similar to the one depicted above are occurring more and more often. There are several reasons for this, the shift towards electronic means of communication in lieu of direct (face to face) contacts being one of them. Loosened relations between staff and managers and properly employed social engineering generate opportunities for those willing to take advantage of the dangerous mix created by modern technology and people's gullibility. While there is no way (and no need) to stop technological progress, companies assisted by experts, including lawyers experienced in similar matters, may undertake various precautionary steps to mitigate the threat.
  • A new act on private flat renting (Act) came into force on May 1 2014. It is intended to improve the position of landlords and motivate investors to build private rental flats, and is a special piece of legislation compared to Civil Code. It means that rights and obligations of the landlord and tenant related to private flat renting will be governed by provisions of the Act. The Civil Code will be used only in cases not covered by the Act. The Act does not apply automatically; it is subject to the tenant's acknowledgement that the rental agreement is entered into in accordance with the Act. Hence, parties may still decide to use the legal regime under the Civil Code.
  • The lighter side of the past month in the world of financial law
  • Soonghee Lee The Korean public's attention has recently turned to some scandalous events involving various Korean conglomerates (more generally known as chaebols). W Group and S Group filed for bankruptcy, followed by D Group. Although W Group successfully restored its ordinary management and operation early on, D Group is still at the centre of complicated social and economic criticisms due to its financial institution affiliations and issues of financial consumer protection. All of these groups are large corporate groups ranked among the top 20 in terms of capital. Korea had already experienced a series of bankruptcy filings by chaebols during the Asian financial crisis from the late 1990s until the early 2000s, when H Group, J Group and K Group went bankrupt one after the other. In some other chaebols, all decision-making was suspended due to the criminal prosecution of chief executive officers. At the moment, all of the chief executive officers of T Group, S Group, H Group and C Group have been criminally prosecuted or are involved in a criminal trial. H Group was investigated by the National Tax Service and the Prosecutor's Office.
  • What is troubling the regulator - and how the market can help
  • Banks’ use of the template is not as guaranteed Private equity exits in China have been rare in recent years due to domestic regulatory issues and structural shifts in its economy. But limited partners (LPs) have called for their return. Exits from Chinese investments have concerned LPs since regulators closed the country's IPO market in late 2012. The government's plans to establish a more market-driven economy might also exacerbate exit difficulties.
  • Hudbay Minerals' hostile takeover of Augusta Resource reveals the rapid progression of defensive tactics in Canada.
  • David Hernand, Paul Hastings In the final weeks of June, OTTERBOURG announced its hire of banking and finance lawyers Jeffrey Rosenthal and Thomas Duignan as partners in New York. The pair, who are certified public accountants, had been with Troutman Sanders following their departure from Greenberg Traurig in February 2013. Also in New York, KING & SPALDING recruited Drew Chapman as a partner from WilmerHale where he headed up the alternative investment team.
  • Janet Butterworth, Norton Rose Fulbright Eric Muller, De Pardieu Brocas Maffei Kai Liebrich, Herbert Smith Freehills Alexander Dolgov, Hogan Lovells