When Tesco PLC announced on September 22, 2014 that its previously forecast first-half profit had been overstated by £250 ($408.8 million), the news of the accounting irregularities was “serious,” as Tesco plc’s CEO of less than a month’s standing at the time put it. The company also announced that the overstatement, first flagged when an
D&O Insurance: Contractual Liability Exclusion Precludes Coverage for Negligent Misrepresentation Claims
In an October 20, 2014 opinion (here), Middle District of Florida Judge Roy B. Dalton, Jr., applying Florida law, entered summary judgment for a D&O insurer, holding that the insurer was not liable for the stipulated judgment its insured had entered because the policy’s broad contractual liability exclusion precluded coverage for the underlying
Many Companies’ Most Significant Regulatory Risks Are Not in Their Home Country
When Chinese regulators hit GlaxoSmithKline with a $489 million penalty last month – the largest corporate penalty ever in China – it set off alarm bells around the world. Among other things it sent out a “wake-up call for global companies that assumed that their main regulatory risk is in their home countries,” according to
Barclays Libor-Scandal Securities Suit Survives Renewed Dismissal Motion
The Libor-scandal based securities suit filed against Barclays and certain of its directors and offices will now be going forward. The case was initially dismissed, but on appeal the Second Circuit vacated a part of the dismissal ruling and returned the case to the district court for further proceedings. The defendants filed a renewed motion
Dismissal Granted in Cyber Breach-Related Derivative Suit Filed Against Wyndham Officials
Along with the separate derivative lawsuit filed against Target Corporation’s board, the cyber breach-related derivate action filed against Wyndham Worldwide Corporation’s board has been closely watched as representative of a potential new area liability exposure for corporate directors and officers. However, in an October 20, 2014 opinion, District of New Jersey Judge Stanley Chesler,
A Whole Bunch of Interesting Litigation and Enforcement Statistics and Analyses
A single case may involve a host of interesting issues but sometimes the important lessons can only be discerned when many cases are considered collectively. This past week saw the release of some interesting analyses of aggregate litigation and enforcement statistics, each set of which told some interesting tales to tell and identified some important
Advisen Releases Third Quarter Corporate and Securities Claims Trends Report
Continuing an recent downward trend, corporate and securities litigation filings during the third quarter declined, both compared to the prior quarter and compared to the third quarter last year, according a new report from Advisen, the insurance information firm. In its report, entitled “D&O Claims Trends: Q3 2014” (available here), Advisen reports that corporate
IPO Companies and Fee-Shifting Bylaws
One of the more interesting recent developments in the D&O liability arena has been the emergence of issues surrounding fee-shifting bylaws. As readers will recall, in May 2014, the Delaware Supreme Court in the ATP Tours case upheld the validity of a non-stock corporation’s bylaw imposing attorneys’ fees on an unsuccessful claimant in an intra-corporate
Book Review: The Global Directors and Officers Deskbook
The increasing globalization of business and commerce presents significant opportunities and major complications. The complications run across a wide variety of issues. Among other things, the complications arising from an increasingly global economy include concerns relating to the liabilities of companies’ directors and officers across jurisdictions. These concerns can vary widely depending on the countries
D&O Insurance: Insured vs. Insured Exclusion Applicability to FDIC Failed Bank Claim Held Ambiguous
As I have previously noted on this blog, one of the recurring D&O insurance coverage issues arising during the latest bank failure wave has been the question whether the Insured vs. Insured Exclusion precludes coverage for claims brought by the FDIC in its capacity as receiver for a failed bank against the failed bank’s former