Search results

In the aftermath of the financial crisis, the individual liability of senior managers has been rediscovered as an important element in effectively countering economic and financial crime. Mainstream enforcement practices against white-collar crime in recent years, focusing mostly on the legal entity or the low- and mid-level employees, have been largely unsuccessful. The punishment of large corporations for economic offences has indeed been confronted with the "too big to jail" dilemma, and with concerns for the negative spillovers that their collapse may entail for employees, shareholders and consumers. The individual "rogue employee", on the other hand, may be fungible and easily sacrificed as a scapegoat. The recent debate has therefore brought back to centre-stage the individual liability of senior managers, which is essential to close any "responsibility gap". But are the ordinary rules of criminal law fit and adequate to hold senior managers accountable? This volume, presenting the findings of a study led by the University of Luxembourg and co-financed by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), aims to contribute to this debate with a special focus on the liability of senior managers for the commission of offences against the financial interests of the EU. It compares the criminal liability regimes for senior managers in five Member States (Finland, France, Germany, The Netherlands and Poland) and delivers a set of policy recommendations for establishing the liability of senior managers in compliance with the general principles of criminal law and respect for fundamental rights.

Indonesia's population is about 235 million in 2010, which becomes a potential market for producers. However, these situations become a problem because of the low education and other social economic problems which cause exploitation on consumer. Although the Law no 8, year of 1999 on consumer protection was launched by the government, the law enforcement on consumer protection is still in question. One of the alternative solutions that can be raised is the regulation of the amendment of consumer protection law by adding the principles of strict liability. It should also include the design for the area of business to be enforced, including the producers who become the subject of the provision.

(1) Under the requirements of the Local Government Act 1900, a system of promoting and regulating good governance in public authorities was introduced. The system involved the establishment of a Standards Board with agreed codes of conduct and enforcement mechanism through monitoring officers. All authority codes of conduct had to be approved by May 1902. The system was introduced under the headline of: "Reconnecting with the people – promoting good governance and ethical behaviour". (2) In the mid‐1980s, the concept of "gatekeeper liability" was beginning to be promoted as a method of enhancing the regulation of boards of directors. The most influential work was that of Kraakman. Kraakman was concerned that a system of regulation was brought forward to respond to enforcement insufficiency in the area of corporate control. A notion of "gatekeeper" liability is one response.This paper explores the system of controlling governance in public authorities (1 above) and its relationship to the gatekeeper response advocated for private corporations (in 2 above). Through this analysis, a series of reflections and signposts are presented as lessons for the private sector and for the enhancement of good governance in that sector.

This book introduces ALM in the context of banks and insurance companies. Although this strategy has a core of fundamental frameworks, models may vary between banks and insurance companies because of the different risks and goals involved. The authors compare and contrast these methodologies to draw parallels between the commonalities and divergences of these two services and thereby provide a deeper understanding of ALM in general.--

Due to the coalition agreement of CDU/CSU and SPD the German Government shall implement a new act on corporate criminal liability before the end of the current election period. After an informal draft from the ministry in lead, the BMJV, was leaked to the public this issue is frequently discussed in the media. The author tries to give an overview on the main items of the draft law, the major concerns against it and the mediating draft of the Munich Concept.

The American Law Institute's ("ALI") involvement with the subject of products liability is developing as one of the most interesting sagas in the modern private law. This Article explores the ALI's efforts to rationalize the subject. Reviewing the ALI's contributions to the evolution of the law in this area, the Article also asks how the Institute should treat the subject in the future, an inquiry that leads us to the broader question of the role of Restatements of the Law in the twenty-first century. In press as Congress considers proposals for sweeping federalization of products liability law, the Article raises the question of how far a private organization should enmesh itself in a heavy politicized branch of law. The idea of "restating" the law derives from several sources, all resting on the premise that one can, in fact, improve the law. Cardozo set up an ideal, in his characteristic rolling cadences, in a 1921 article proposing a "ministry of justice. The ALI first under- took Restatements in 1923, attacking simultaneously the subjects of contracts, torts, and conflict of laws. After the completion of the first round of Restatements, William Draper Lewis, director of the Institute, summarized the premise of those projects as "the belief that out of the mass of case authority and legal literature could be made clear statements of the rules of the common law today operative in the great majority of our States, expressed as simply as the character of our complex civilization admits."

Experience gained from providing expert testimony in court has uncovered a number of issues pertinent to the science and practice of human factors engineering. Cases reviewed here provide some insight into the kinds of problems encountered and the benefits which derive from this exposure. It appears that liability suits will prove to be the testing ground not only for consumer products but for the products of human factors research as well. Such cases are also suggestive of the criteria the courts will apply to future research efforts.

The use of personalization mechanisms should allow the insurance distributor to reduce exploration costs and adjust the offered insurance product to the needs, features, and situation of each individual client. This study seeks to examine how liability should be allocated when the process of the personalization of an insurance product does not result in the client's choice of an optimal product. First, we identify the typical uses of new technologies allowing for an adjustment of insurance contracts. Second, we analyze the interplay between their application and the legal obligations of insurance product distributors. Subsequently, the paper discusses the scope of factors the insurance distributor is liable for when using personalizing tools in contacts with clients. We submit that offering an online personalization of insurance products ought to be regarded as being equivalent to providing advice under Art. 2, Sec. 1, Point 15 of the European Union Insurance Distribution Directive (IDD). From the consumer's perspective, our analysis makes the case for the insurance distributor's liability for mispersonalization of an insurance contract.