Time for Challenging an Arbitration Award

The extent of the residual jurisdiction of the courts to interfere with the awards of arbitrators has always been the subject of much debate between those who believe that the court should have ultimate control and those who argue for finality of awards and the consequent absence of any right of appeal. In England the balance is struck by allowing appeals and court control of arbitrations in the limited circumstances set out in section 67(lack of Jurisdiction), section 68(serious irregularity) and Section 69(appeal on point of law) of the Arbitration Act 1996. One of the many factors limiting the involvement of the court in reviewing awards is the need under section 70(2) for the application to be made within 28 days of the award. Section 80(5) gives the Court a discretionary power to extend this time limit. (May 2008)

New Litigation Risk: Foreign-Based Employee Permitted to Sue Under Sarbanes-Oxley

Employees working overseas for U.S. companies may be permitted to file litigation in the United States under a decision rendered February 5 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The decision in O’Mahony v. Accenture Ltd. and Accenture LLP also specifically permits application of anti-retaliation provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act to a foreign national employed in a foreign country. U.S. companies with foreign operations should understand the potential ramifications of this decision. (May 2008)

LNG Projects: All in Agreement

Liquefied Natural Gas ("LNG") projects are unique in the sense of the significant capital requirements required to set up the infrastructural elements of an LNG trade and the long term supply and demand necessary to make the project viable. The amounts of money involved are big even for the energy industry. (April 2008)

H-1B Visa Lotteries Conducted, F-1 OPT Extended for Qualified Students and Employers

Random lotteries for available H-1B visas were conducted April 14. The 15-day premium processing period for selected petitions also commenced on that date. In other recent developments, a new Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services allows for extension of optional practical training for F-1 students with science, technology, engineering and mathematics degrees. This rule, which is effective immediately, also expands H-1B cap-gap relief for F-1 students with pending H-1B petitions. (April 2008)

Homeland Security Defends ‘Safe Harbor’ Argument in Supplemental Rule

A recent supplemental proposed rule issued by the Department of Homeland Security makes only minor changes to the controversial Safe-Harbor Procedures for Employers Who Receive a No-Match Letter. Instead, the supplemental rule primarily responds to legal challenges blocking the proposed safe harbor rule—and further asserts DHS authority to investigate and pursue sanctions against employers who knowingly hire unauthorized workers. (April 2008)

China Law Update - April 2008

In this issue of China Law Update, we summarize three new circulars issued by the Chinese government in February 2008. All three continue efforts to smooth implementation of the PRC Enterprise Income Tax Law, which was issued by the National People’s Congress in March 2007 and dramatically changed the country’s tax policies for both foreign- and Chinese-owned businesses. (April 2008)

Exempt Organizations Get Points For Trying: Final Excess Benefit Transactions Regulations Stress Proactive Approach

The Internal Revenue Service recently issued final regulations describing the factors it considers when determining whether to revoke an organization’s tax exempt status as a result of one or more excess benefit transactions. The new regulations, issued on March 28, 2008, make clear that the exempt organization will benefit from taking affirmative steps to prevent, detect, and remedy excess benefit transactions, even if those steps are taken after an excess benefit transaction occurs. (April 2008)

The International Implications of IRC §409A

Deferred compensation arrangements issued by foreign-owned operations or by US companies with operations abroad were not originally exempt from the application of Internal Revenue Code §409A. However, under proposed and now final regulations issued by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”), there are exemptions that apply which are geared towards limiting the effect of §409A on non-resident aliens and US citizens or residents who participate in non-US plans. (March 2008)

Continued Insurance Coverage, Reimbursement and In-Kind Benefit Commitments Under Section 409A

“Deferred compensation”— as it’s typically understood — involves a commitment to pay an employee a specified amount of money at a specified time in the future. But what if an employer agrees to reimburse an employee for country club dues, life insurance premiums or use of a car for a certain period of time post-termination? What may not immediately look like deferred compensation may well be. And employers must be mindful that making a coverage, reimbursement or in-kind benefit commitment may have implications under Internal Revenue Code Section 409A. (March 2008)

E-disclosure – Meeting the New Challenge

Legal and technological developments are capable of generating both challenges and additional expense for businesses. Combine the two and, for some, the results could be overwhelming. Taking a proactive review of how your organisation handles its electronic documents, and ensuring that you have policies and procedures in place to plan for the risk of having to undertake an electronic disclosure exercise now, could pay significant dividends later. (March 2008)

[ 1 ]   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   Next