In this article for Finascope, Muriel Goldberg-Darmon, Guillaume Guérin, and Pierre Wolman discuss the Autorité des Marchés Financiers (AMF's) modification of the Investigations Guidelines (Charte de l’enquête et du contrôle) regarding the right to remain silent. They also examine its articulation with a potential obstruction and/or cooperation with the AMF during an investigation.

 

The cryptocurrency industry should brace itself for increased scrutiny from the DOJ and other enforcement agencies. The DOJ recently announced the creation of a National Cryptocurrency Enforcement Team (“NCET”), which will have the authority to tackle investigations and prosecutions of criminal misuses of cryptocurrency. NCET will not only pursue its own cases but will work closely with other federal agencies, subject matter experts, and law enforcement partners throughout the government to support existing and future cases across the country.

• The announcement further suggests that NCET’s initial mandate will broaden the enforcement focus from criminal actors themselves to those who enable and facilitate illicit activities involving cryptocurrency.
• Cryptocurrency exchanges should take appropriate steps to work with counsel to avoid becoming the subject of a DOJ investigation or prosecution.
• The increased scrutiny will also likely extend to all cryptocurrency-focused businesses, NFT platforms, companies that accept cryptocurrency as payment, and even those that merely do business with third parties dealing in cryptocurrency.
• Given the heightened scrutiny from the DOJ and a constantly evolving regulatory landscape, all companies in the industry should evaluate compliance programs and practices to mitigate risk and exposure.

In this C&G client alert, Christian R Everdell and Barbara K Luse explore the specifics of the NCET mandate, including its anticipated collaboration with the SEC and other federal agencies, and examine what’s on the horizon for cryptocurrency exchanges and other cryptocurrency-focused businesses. The authors identify some key takeaways for companies dealing with cryptocurrency, including cryptocurrency exchanges, crypto funds and financial institutions, and more.

In this bylined article for Forbes, Muriel Goldberg-Darmon discusses the latest trends in the SPAC market in Europe and the U.S. She also examines recent EU recommendations and potential risks regarding the disclosure of information.

In this article for the New York State Bar Association, C. Evan Stewart explores the consequences of lawyers serving as directors of public companies and examines the ongoing criminal trial of USA v. Holmes.

The Financial Conduct Authority (the “FCA”) issued a prohibition order against Mr Frensham based on his conviction for an offence which did not involve financial fraud or dishonesty and was unrelated to regulated activity. Following a referral, the Upper Tribunal considered such a prohibition for the first time in Frensham v The Financial Conduct Authority [2021] UKUT 0222 (TCC). Although the Tribunal concluded that the conviction alone was insufficient to make a prohibition order, the FCA’s decision was nonetheless upheld due to Mr Frensham’s failure to be open and transparent with the FCA during the course of the criminal investigation and later regulatory proceedings brought by the Chartered Insurance Institute (“CII”), which meant that he lacked integrity. In short, the Tribunal concluded that “it is not the fact that a criminal offence has been committed that is fatal to an applicant’s case but the manner in which he deals with the consequences that follow. In this case, we have found that the way Mr Frensham dealt with those consequences demonstrated a lack of integrity which entitles the Authority to exercise the prohibition power in order to further its statutory objectives”.

The Tribunal’s carefully reasoned judgment provides essential guidance both to the FCA and to firms assessing an individual’s fitness under the Senior Managers and Certification Regime (“SMCR”), and more generally under the Individual Conduct Rules (“COCON”), on how non-financial misconduct committed in an individual’s private life, where unrelated to their regulated activity, should be approached. This C&G Client Alert reviews the facts and the law, and analyses key lessons from the case.

In his latest legal history article for the Federal Bar Council Quarterly, C. Evan Stewart explores the trials of the “Scottsboro Boys,” and the Supreme Court decisions surrounding the 1931 Alabama tragedy.

The corporate bankruptcy & insolvency litigation landscape has drastically changed as a result of COVID-19. With government relief packages winding down, the financial impact of the pandemic will increasingly be playing out in bankruptcy and insolvency proceedings. As this picture becomes clear, businesses should understand the key questions and answers necessary to prepare for resulting disputes.

• What are the common issues arising in the corporate bankruptcy and insolvency process in today’s market, and how will those issues complicate bankruptcy litigation?
• How have recent court rulings impacted the corporate bankruptcy litigation space, and how are these issues likely to affect parties going forward?
• What are the most significant factors in reaching as positive an outcome as possible for all parties involved in a bankruptcy dispute?

In this roundtable feature published by Financier Worldwide, Daniel H Tabak joins other bankruptcy and litigation experts from the United States and United Kingdom to answer these questions and more. The panelists discuss recent trends and examine what’s next for businesses that may find themselves navigating bankruptcy and insolvency disputes and what they need to know going forward.

On the 27^th of July this year, the UK Financial Conduct Authority (the “FCA”) published a policy statement setting out its final rules and changes to its listing rules for certain special purpose acquisition companies, or ‘SPACs’. These follow the government’s review of the UK listing regulations led by Lord Johnathan Hill earlier in the year, discussed in Cohen & Gresser’s 7 May 2021 client alert. In its announcement accompanying the policy statement, the FCA explained that the new rules and associated guidance, which will come into force on 10 August 2021, are intended to “provide more flexibility to larger SPACs, provided they embed certain features that promote investor protection and the smooth operation of the UK’s markets.” This client alert details the key changes introduced in the FCA’s policy statement.

In his latest legal history article for the Federal Bar Council Quarterly, C. Evan Stewart explains what really went wrong in the most important antitrust trial of the 1970s: Berkey Photo v. Kodak.

In this article for the journal of Fiscalité Internationale, Franck Le Mentec discusses the latest developments in the field of international taxation.

In this article for the journal of Fiscalité Internationale, Franck Le Mentec discusses the latest developments in the field of international taxation.

In this bylined article for Forbes, Muriel Goldberg-Darmon discusses the safeguard and treatment of the voting rights during shareholders' meetings. She also examines recent recommendations and sanctions handed down by the AMF and offers guidance for how companies can better protect their shareholders' voting rights moving forward.

The explosive growth of SPACs (“special purpose acquisition companies”) as a mechanism for taking private companies public is leading to a similar increase in SPAC-related lawsuits. As both trends appear likely to continue, it’s important for SPACs, their sponsors and directors, and their targeted private companies to be aware of and take steps to manage potential litigation risks.

• The specific characteristics of SPACs present unique litigation issues.
• Understanding those issues are crucial to mitigating litigation risk and closing delay.
• There are several affirmative steps that SPACs, sponsors and directors, and advisors should consider to reduce both litigation risk and exposure.

In this client alert, Jeffrey Lang and Luke Appling examine the growing trend of SPAC litigation, the characteristics of SPACs that pose litigation risk, and provide seven affirmative steps SPAC sponsors, directors, and their advisors should take to mitigate litigation risk and potential liability.

In the latest “What’s On Your Wall” feature for the Federal Bar Council Quarterly, C. Evan Stewart pays tribute to Walter LaFeber, his friend and mentor.

In his latest column for the Federal Bar Council Quarterly, C. Evan Stewart discusses the origins of the Civil Rights Act of 1875 and subsequent cases brought to the Supreme Court.

In this C&G client alert, lawyers from our New York, London, and Paris offices discuss the evolution of SPAC investment in the U.S., UK, and French financial markets and provide an in-depth analysis of the position taken by the regulatory authority in each of these prominent financial hubs to help potential sponsors, investors, and target companies determine the right market for their needs.

In this article for PLI Chronicle, C Evan Stewart explores the key issues that lawyers must navigate when practicing in multiple jurisdictions.

In this article for the journal of Fiscalité Internationale, Franck Le Mentec discusses the latest developments in the field of international taxation.

In this client alert, Jeffrey M Bronheim, Daniel H Mathias, and James R Mossetto detail key documentation considerations in where conflicts of interest may potentially arise, and why this trend is likely to continue. This article was first published on the-drawdown.com (subscription required).

Following several years of negotiations and political posturing, the United Kingdom left the European Union at the end of 2020. Throughout the negotiations, two issues, in particular, proved the most complicated:  First was the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland and second was the treatment and recognition of regulations in the Financial Services industry. So what’s next for Financial Services in the UK? This C&G client alert examines the phrase “Brexit means Brexit” and explores its implications to answer what’s next for Financial Services firms operating in both the UK and EU. The authors look at the requirements for both international and UK-based firms and offer guidance for potential next steps.