DOCSLIB.ORG

Post-Morrison: the Global Journey Towards Asset Recovery by the NAPPA Morrison Working Group June 2016 INTRODUCTION

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Post-Morrison: the Global Journey Towards Asset Recovery by the NAPPA Morrison Working Group June 2016 INTRODUCTION Post-Morrison: The Global Journey Towards Asset Recovery By the NAPPA Morrison Working Group June 2016 INTRODUCTION Six years ago the Supreme Court of the United States, by its decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank, Ltd., 561 U.S. 247 (2010), launched the institutional investor’s odyssey into the developing world of non-U.S. securities law and regulation. Understanding the implications of Morrison on an investor’s ability to recover assets lost due to the malfeasance of others, NAPPA membership began to develop the tools and identify the resources necessary to conduct appropriate risk/reward analysis with respect to the uncharted waters of foreign securities litigation. NAPPA’s working group: Securities Litigation, Including Remedies Outside the U.S. published, “Living in a Post- Morrison World: How To Protect Your Assets Against Securities Fraud” in June of 2012, which served as a first of its kind guide (the “Morrison White Paper”). As institutional investors continue to look for opportunities to invest globally, and given the post-Morrison world, it is critical for institutions -- particularly those of us who are fiduciaries and consider a litigation to be an asset of the fund to be treated just like any other asset of the fund in terms of risk, cost and return -- to have a plan in place to consider how best to approach recovery of assets in the event of a loss. Institutional investors have witnessed an increase in foreign group actions abroad for purposes of asset recovery. A number of NAPPA members have participated in these cases. With the first of the post-Morrison foreign cases announcing settlements in very recent times, the working group thought this would be a good time to update the Morrison White Paper. The Working Group has created this paper, which provides the current state of various courts’ interpretation of Morrison; practical considerations for institutional investors when considering foreign actions, the current state of securities laws of 15 foreign jurisdictions; and select foreign case studies, which show how some of the first foreign cases have been resolved and highlight those cases to watch. We hope that this paper will be a useful and educational tool. As co-chairs of the Working Group, we would like to thank each member of the Morrison sub-committee for their efforts over the last several months. Their research, tremendous work and dedication to this project has produced a paper that is extraordinarily valuable and instrumental in helping institutions and practitioners to better understand the state of the securities laws in the post-Morrison world. Catherine E. LaMarr Christopher J. Supple General Counsel Deputy Executive Director and General Counsel State of Connecticut Commonwealth of Massachusetts Office of the Treasurer Pension Reserves Investment Management Board Co-Chair, NAPPA Securities Litigation Co-Chair, NAPPA Securities Litigation Working Group Working Group THE CONTRIBUTING MEMBERS OF THE GROUP ARE: Karen M. Grenon, Morrison Sub-Committee Coordinator Office of the Connecticut Treasurer Rachel Avan, Labaton Sucharow LLP Jonathan Beemer, Entwistle & Capucci, LLP Stanley Bernstein, Bernstein Liebhard LLP Peter Borkin, Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro, LLP Darren Check, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP Emily Christiansen, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP Joshua S. Devore, Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC Nicholas Diamand, Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP Andrew Entwistle, Entwistle & Capucci, LLP Jason Geisker, Maurice Blackburn Lawyers Karen M. Grenon, Office of the Treasurer, State of Connecticut Simon Jaffa, Barnea & Co. Geoffrey Jarvis, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP Barbara Hart, Lowey Dannenberg Cohen & Hart P.C. Reed Kathrein, Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro, LLP Michael Korn, Labaton Sucharow LLP Joy A. Kruse, Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP Nicole Lavallee, Berman Devalerio Christina McPhaul, Lowey Dannenberg Cohen & Hart P.C. Frank Meckes, Wach + Meckes LLP Matthew D. Pearson, Berman Devalerio Megan Peitzmeier, Colorado Public Employees’ Retirement Association Jennifer Rudnick, Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP Maya Saxena, Saxena White, P.A. Irwin Schwartz,* BLA Schwartz Thomas Skelton, Lowey Dannenberg Cohen & Hart P.C. Daniel S. Sommers, Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC Michael Stocker, Labaton Sucharow LLP Richard Texier, Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP Keith Thomas, Stewarts Law LLP Karen Vermaere, Laurius Times Wang, Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC Kathryn Weidner, Saxena White, P.A. James Weir, Bernstein Liebhard LLP *Editorial Support This white paper is for guidance only and is not intended to provide legal advice. This document is primarily intended for the personal educational use of NAPPA members only and is subject to copyright. Permission to use, copy or reprint this white paper or its contents for any other purpose requires the advanced written permission of NAPPA. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. THE SHIFTING GLOBAL LANDSCAPE OF SECURITIES FRAUD CASES ...................................................... 1 A. Legal Landscape ........................................................................................................................................... 2 B. The Effect of Morrison on ADRs ................................................................................................................ 8 C. Alternatives to Foreign Litigation – Bringing State Law Claims on an Individual Basis ................................... 13 D. Foreign Law Claims ................................................................................................................................... 22 E. RICO Claims ............................................................................................................................................. 24 II. PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS INTERESTED IN FOREIGN ASSET RECOVERY ACTIONS.................................................................................................................................... 26 A. Evaluating Whether To Participate In A Foreign Asset Recovery Action ......................................................... 27 B. Analysis of Potential Asset Recovery Actions (Evaluating Participation Agreements/Funding Agreements From Competing Groups) .................................................................................................................................... 30 C. The Role of Domestic Law Firms/Monitoring Companies In Foreign Litigation (Referral Fees, Expectations) .. 32 D. Evaluation of Foreign Counsel .................................................................................................................... 34 III. SURVEY OF COUNTRIES .............................................................................................................................. 36 A. Australia .................................................................................................................................................... 37 B. Belgium ..................................................................................................................................................... 45 C. Brazil ......................................................................................................................................................... 51 D. Canada ....................................................................................................................................................... 56 E. Denmark .................................................................................................................................................... 67 F. England and Wales ..................................................................................................................................... 71 G. France ........................................................................................................................................................ 78 H. Germany .................................................................................................................................................... 83 I. India .......................................................................................................................................................... 90 J. Israel ......................................................................................................................................................... 94 K. Japan ......................................................................................................................................................... 98 L. Mexico .................................................................................................................................................... 102 M. The Netherlands ....................................................................................................................................... 107 N. South Korea ............................................................................................................................................. 116 O. Spain ....................................................................................................................................................... 125 IV. CASE STUDIES ............................................................................................................................................ 129 A. Resolved and Settled Cases ......................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • (A) Bond Plaintiffs' Motion
    Case 1:08-cv-09522-SHS Document 160 Filed 06/07/13 Page 1 of 89 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK IN RE CITIGROUP INC. BOND LITIGATION Master File No. 08 Civ. 9522 (SHS) ECF Case DECLARATION OF STEVEN B. SINGER IN SUPPORT OF: (I) BOND PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AND PLAN OF ALLOCATION, AND (II) BOND COUNSEL’S MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND REIMBURSEMENT OF LITIGATION EXPENSES Case 1:08-cv-09522-SHS Document 160 Filed 06/07/13 Page 2 of 89 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 II. PROSECUTION OF THE ACTION .................................................................................. 4 A. Bond Counsel’s Efforts to Identify and Preserve the Claims of Investors in Citigroup’s Bonds and Preferred Stock .................................................................. 4 B. Preparation of the Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint, and Summary of the Claims Asserted ........................................................................... 6 C. The Citigroup Defendants’ and the Underwriter Defendants’ Extensive Motions to Dismiss ............................................................................................... 12 D. The Court’s Opinions Largely Denying Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss, and Denying Defendants’ Motion for Reconsideration ........................................ 15 E. Bond Plaintiffs Conduct Extensive Discovery and Motion Practice
    [Show full text]
  • India's Satyam Scandal
    Review of Business and Finance Studies Vol. 6, No. 2, 2015, pp. 35-43 ISSN: 2150-3338 (print) ISSN: 2156-8081 (online) www.theIBFR.com INDIA’S SATYAM SCANDAL: EVIDENCE THE TOO LARGE TO INDICT MINDSET OF ACCOUNTING REGULATORS IS A GLOBAL PHENOMENON Kalpana Pai, Texas Wesleyan University Thomas D. Tolleson, Texas Wesleyan University ABSTRACT This paper examines the capture of government regulators using the case of Satyam Computer Services Ltd., one of India’s largest software and services companies, which disclosed a $1.47 billion fraud on its balance sheet on January 7, 2009. The firm, which traded on the New York and Bombay Stock Exchanges, was required to file financial reports with the SEC. Price Waterhouse of India, the local member of PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC), served as its auditor. After news of the scandal hit the airwaves, Price Waterhouse of India issued a press release and stated that its audit was conducted in accordance with applicable auditing standards and was supported by sufficient audit evidence. Because Satyam shares were quoted on Wall Street, SEC rules prohibited auditors from having business relations with their clients. U.S. regulators failed to take action against PWC. Is this lack of enforcement related to PWC’s size and the impact that the failure of a Big 4 firm would have on the global financial marketplace? We question whether government regulators have been captured by the key market players in the auditing services market. One outcome of this “capture” is moral hazard, which implies that the Big 4 accounting firms, or their local affiliates, may place less emphasis on quality audits.
    [Show full text]
  • Zerohack Zer0pwn Youranonnews Yevgeniy Anikin Yes Men
    Zerohack Zer0Pwn YourAnonNews Yevgeniy Anikin Yes Men YamaTough Xtreme x-Leader xenu xen0nymous www.oem.com.mx www.nytimes.com/pages/world/asia/index.html www.informador.com.mx www.futuregov.asia www.cronica.com.mx www.asiapacificsecuritymagazine.com Worm Wolfy Withdrawal* WillyFoReal Wikileaks IRC 88.80.16.13/9999 IRC Channel WikiLeaks WiiSpellWhy whitekidney Wells Fargo weed WallRoad w0rmware Vulnerability Vladislav Khorokhorin Visa Inc. Virus Virgin Islands "Viewpointe Archive Services, LLC" Versability Verizon Venezuela Vegas Vatican City USB US Trust US Bankcorp Uruguay Uran0n unusedcrayon United Kingdom UnicormCr3w unfittoprint unelected.org UndisclosedAnon Ukraine UGNazi ua_musti_1905 U.S. Bankcorp TYLER Turkey trosec113 Trojan Horse Trojan Trivette TriCk Tribalzer0 Transnistria transaction Traitor traffic court Tradecraft Trade Secrets "Total System Services, Inc." Topiary Top Secret Tom Stracener TibitXimer Thumb Drive Thomson Reuters TheWikiBoat thepeoplescause the_infecti0n The Unknowns The UnderTaker The Syrian electronic army The Jokerhack Thailand ThaCosmo th3j35t3r testeux1 TEST Telecomix TehWongZ Teddy Bigglesworth TeaMp0isoN TeamHav0k Team Ghost Shell Team Digi7al tdl4 taxes TARP tango down Tampa Tammy Shapiro Taiwan Tabu T0x1c t0wN T.A.R.P. Syrian Electronic Army syndiv Symantec Corporation Switzerland Swingers Club SWIFT Sweden Swan SwaggSec Swagg Security "SunGard Data Systems, Inc." Stuxnet Stringer Streamroller Stole* Sterlok SteelAnne st0rm SQLi Spyware Spying Spydevilz Spy Camera Sposed Spook Spoofing Splendide
    [Show full text]
  • Stock Market Participation in the Aftermath of an Accounting Scandal
    Stock market participation in the aftermath of an accounting scandal Renuka Sane∗ National Institute of Public Finance and Policy June 2017 Abstract In this paper we study the impact on investor behaviour of fraud revelation. We ask if investors with direct exposure to stock market fraud (treated investors) are more likely to decrease their participation in the stock market than investors with no direct exposure to fraud (control investors)? Using daily investor account holdings data from the National Stock Depository Limited (NSDL), the largest depository in India, we find that treated investors cash out almost 10.6 percentage points of their overall portfolio relative to control investors post the crisis. The cashing out is largely restricted to the bad stock. Over the period of a month, there is no difference in the trading behaviour of the treated and control investors. These results are contrary to those found in mature economies. ∗I thank Jayesh Mehta, Tarun Ramadorai, Ajay Shah, K. V. Subramaniam, Susan Thomas, Harsh Vardhan, participants of the IGIDR Emerging Markets Conference, 2016, NSE-NYU conference, 2016, for useful comments. Anurag Dutt provided excellent research assistance. I thank the NSE-NYU initiative on financial markets for funding support, and Finance Research Group, IGIDR for access to data. 1 Contents 1 Introduction 3 2 Data 5 2.1 Sample . .7 3 Research design 8 3.1 The Satyam fraud . .8 3.2 The matching framework . 11 3.3 Main outcome of interest . 13 3.4 Difference-in-difference . 16 4 Results 16 4.1 Effect on cashing out of portfolio . 16 4.2 Effect on cashing out Satyam .
    [Show full text]
  • Case 1:09-Md-02027-BSJ Document 253 Filed 02/17/11 Page 1 of 163
    Case 1:09-md-02027-BSJ Document 253 Filed 02/17/11 Page 1 of 163 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re: 09 MD 2027 (BSJ) (Consolidated Action) SATYAM COMPUTER SERVICES LTD. SECURITIES LITIGATION JURY TRIAL DEMANDED This Document A..lies to: All Cases FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER & GRANT & EISENHOFER P.A ^° ? GROSSMANN,LLP Jay W. Eisenhofer Max W. Berg er Keith M. Fleischman °D• rq Steven B. Singer Mary S. Thomas Bruce Bernstein Deborah A. Elman 1285 Avenue of the Americas, 38th Floor Ananda Chaudhuri New York, NY 10019 485 Lexington Ave., 29th Floor Tel: (212) 554-1400 New York, New York 10017 Fax: (212) 554-1444 Tel: (646) 722-8500 Fax: (646) 722-8501 Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs BARROWAY TOPAZ KESSLER LABATON SUCHAROW LLP MELTZER & CHECK, LLP Joel H. Bernstein David Kessler Louis Gottlieb Sean M. Handler Michael H. Rogers Sharan Nirmul Felicia Y. Mann Christopher L. Nelson 140 Broadway Neena Verma New York, NY 10005 Joshua E. D'Ancona Tel: (212) 907-0700 280 King of Prussia Road Fax: (212) 818-0477 Radnor, PA 19087 Tel: (610) 667-7706 Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs Fax: (610) 667-7056 Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs i' Case 1:09-md-02027-BSJ Document 253 Filed 02/17/11 Page 2 of 163 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. SUMMARY OF THE ACTION 2 II. JURISDICTION & VENUE 7 III. PARTIES AND RELEVANT NON-PARTIES 8 A. Lead Plaintiffs 8 B. Additional Named Plaintiffs 9 C.
    [Show full text]
  • Saji Vettiyil, Et Al. V. Satyam Computer Services Ltd., Et Al. 09-CV-00117
    1 Nicole Lavallee (SBN 165755) Email: [email protected] 2 Lesley Ann Hale (SBN 237726) 3 Email:[email protected] BERMAN DeVALERIO 4 425 California Street Suite 2100 5 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 433-3200 6 Facsimile: (415) 433-6382 7 Christopher J. Keller Alan I. Ellman 8 Stefanie J. Sundel LABATON SUCHAROW LLP 9 140 Broadway New York, New York 10005 10 Telephone: (212) 907-0700 Facsimile: (212) 818-0477 11 Email: [email protected] 12 Attorneys for Mineworkers’ Pension Scheme and Proposed Lead Counsel for the Class 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 14 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION 15 16 SAJI VETTIYIL, Individually and on Behalf ) 17 of All Others Similarly Situated, ) )Civil Action No.: C-09-00117 RS 18 Plaintiff, ) )Mag. Judge Richard Seeborg 19 vs. ) ) 20 SATYAM COMPUTER SERVICES, LTD., )Hearing B. RAMALINGA RAJU, B. RAMA RAJU, ) Date: April 22, 2009 21 SRINIVAS VADLAMANI, PRICE ) WATERHOUSE, ) Time: 9:30 A.M. 22 PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS ) Courtroom:4 INTERNATIONAL, LTD., ) 23 Defendants. ) 24 ) 25 NOTICE OF FILING MINEWORKERS’ PENSION SCHEME’ MEMORANDUM 26 OF LAW IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR CONSOLIDATION APPOINTMENT AS LEAD PLAINTIFF, AND APPROVAL OF SELECTION OF 27 LEAD COUNSEL, AND IN OPPOSITION TO THE COMPETING MOTIONS 28 [C-09-00117 RS] NOTICE OF FILING MINEWORKERS’ PENSION SCHEME’ MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR CONSOLIDATION APPOINTMENT AS LEAD PLAINTIFF, AND APPROVAL OF SELECTION OF LEAD COUNSEL, AND IN OPPOSITION TO THE COMPETING MOTIONS 1 Mineworkers’ Pension Scheme (“Mineworkers’ Pension”) hereby informs the Court, all 2 parties, and their counsel of record that Mineworkers’ Pension filed on March 26, 2009 in the 3 action entitled Patel v.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on Research Project of Financial Scams in India
    REPORT ON RESEARCH PROJECT OF FINANCIAL SCAMS IN INDIA Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement of the Masters in Business Administration Programme Offered by Jain University during the year 2013-14 BY MOHAMMED MAAZ 3rd Semester MBA UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF PROF.SHRUTI AGARWAL # 319, 17th Cross, 25th Main, JP Nagar 6th Phase Bangalore – 560 078 Phone : 080-43430400, Fax : 080-26532730 E-mail : [email protected], Website : www.bschool.cms.ac.in Declaration I, hereby declare that this Lab Hours / Project (Research Project) on FINANCIAL SCAMS IN INDIA is prepared by me during the academic year 2014-15 under the guidance of prof. Shruti Agarwal. I also declare that this project which is the partial fulfillment of the requirement for MBA programme Offered by Jain University, it is the result of my own efforts with the help of experts. Name : MOHAMMED MAAZ Sem : 3rd Sec : “C” Reg.No : 13MBA63049 Date : Place : Signature ACKNOWLEDGEMENT It gives me immense pleasure in presenting the project report on Financial Scams in India Firstly, I take the opportunity in thanking almightily and my parents without whose continuous blessings, I would not have been able to complete this project. I would like to thank my project guide Prof. Shruti Agarwal for her great help, valuable opinions, advice and suggestions in fulfillment of this project. I am also grateful to Prof. Durga Praveena for encouraging me to select the project topic. I am thankful to our college for all the possible assistance and support, by making available the required books and the internet room which have proved useful to me in successfully completing my project.
    [Show full text]
  • Inside Safe Assets
    Inside Safe Assets Anna Gelpern and Erik F. Gerdingt "Safe assets" is a catch-all term to describe financial contracts that market participants treat as if they were risk-free. These may include government debt, bank deposits, and asset-backed securities, among others. The InternationalMonetary Fund estimatedpotential safe assets at more than $114 trillion worldwide in 2011, more than seven times the U.S. economic output that year. To treat any contract as if it were risk-free seems delusional after apparently super-safe public and private debt markets collapsed overnight. Nonetheless, safe asset supply and demand have been invoked to explain shadow banking, financial crises, and prolonged economic stagnation. The economic literaturespeaks of safe assets in terms of poorly understood natural forces or essential particles newly discovered in a super-collider. Law is virtually absent in this account. Our Article makes four contributions that help to establish law's place in the safe asset debate and connect the debate to post-crisis law scholarship. First,we describe the legal architectureof safe assets. Existing theories do not explain where safe assets get their safety. Understanding this is an essential first step to designing a regulatory response to the risks they entail. Second, we offer a unified analyticalframework that links the safe asset debate with post- crisis legal critiques of money, banking, structuredfinance and bankruptcy. Third, we highlight sources of instability and distortion in the legal T Gelpern is Professor at Georgetown Law and a Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Peter G. Peterson Institute for International Economics; Gerding is Professor and Associate Dean for Academic Affairs at Colorado Law.
    [Show full text]
  • ISSN: 2395-5929] UGC Jr
    Impact Factor.1.14: Mayas Publication [ISSN: 2395-5929] UGC Jr. No. : 45308: Paper ID: 13170813 AN URGENT NEED OF ETHICAL EDUCATION FOR ACCOUNTANTS AND AUDITORS IN INDIA Paper Recceived : 8th Aug 2017 Paper Accepted : 20th Aug 2017 Paper Published : 30th Aug 2017 Reviewers : Dr.Rambabu Gopisetti Dr.M.Mohamed Dr.M. RAMACHANDRA GOWDA Mrs.S.R. MADHAVI Professor and Coordinator-MFA & MTTM Research Scholar Department of Commerce Department of Commerce Bangalore University Bangalore University Bangalore. Bangalore. Abstract Auditors and Accountants in India to mitigate Corporate Scandals. For the purpose of study secondary data has Globalization leads to Social, political and been collected, processed and presented in the form of technological changes have challenged traditional idea of tables, figures and Interpreted accordingly.. professional practice by accountants and auditors. Ethics is a code or moral system provides criteria for evaluating Keywords— Ethics, Auditors, Accountants, Corporate right and wrong. Scams, Ethical Education. The high standard of ethical behavior is expected from I. INTRODUCTION Professional like Accountants and Auditors. From two In competitive corporate world accounting and decades lot of Corporate scams noticed in India Bofors Scam, Enron scandal, World Com scam, Tyco scandal, auditing profession is extremely important to be Telgi Scam, The Hawala Scandal, Harshad Mehta &Ketan ethical in their practices due to the very nature of Parekh Stock Market Scam, Health south scandal, Freddie their profession. The Professionals should maintain Mac scandal, American International Group scandal confidence of clients and ethical conduct. Ensuring (AIG), Lehman brothers scandal, Bernie Madoff scandal, highest ethical standards is important to a public Satyam scandal, 2G Spectrum Scam, the UTI scam, C.R.
    [Show full text]
  • The Growth of Sebi
    THE GROWTH OF SEBI - FROM HARSHAD MEHTA TO SUBRATA ROY By Simran Chandok410 INTRODUCTION The Securities Exchange Board of India popularly known as SEBI is in its 27th year of existence. However, the original architects of SEBI would not recognize what it has become today. From a mere regulatory authority to a statutory authority; from a silent spectator to the market watchdogs; SEBI has come a long way since its inception. SEBI came into existence on 12th April, 1988. It replaced the Controller of Capital Issues Department of the Government. In 1988, SEBI had limited powers with a negligible jurisdiction. In 1992, the SEBI Act bestowed a plethora of responsibilities on the body and gave it a statutory status. Thus after 1992, SEBI was known as a statutory authority and its jurisdiction extended to the whole country except the erstwhile princely states of Jammu & Kashmir. The SEBI Board is headed by a Chairman (nominated by the Union Government of India). The Board consists of 2 Officers from the Union Finance Ministry serving as whole time members, 1 member from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and 5 members nominated by the RBI (at least 3 out of 5 RBI nominated members must be whole time members). Currently, U.K. Sinha is the Chairman of the SEBI Board. Since its inception, SEBI has grown steadfastly. Its gradual growth can be analyzed through 3 scams- Harshad Mehta Securities Fraud, Satyam Scandal and Sahara Scam. DEVELOPMENT OF SEBI THROUGH THE 3 DECADES Harshad Mehta Securities Fraud (1988-1995) 410 2nd Year BBA LLB (Hons.), Symbiosis Law School, Pune International Journal For Legal Developments & Allied Issues Volume 1 Issue 2 [ISSN 2454-1273] 205 In 1988, SEBI had limited powers.
    [Show full text]
  • Who's Running the Company?
    Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized ©Copyright 2012. All rights reserved. International Finance Corporation 2121 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20433 The findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed in this publication should not be attributed in any manner to the International Finance Corporation, to its affiliated organizations, or to members of its board of Executive Directors or the countries they represent. The International Finance Corporation does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this publication and accepts no responsibility for any consequence of their use. The material in this work is protected by copyright. Copying and/or transmitting portions or all of this work may be a violation of applicable law. The International Finance Corporation encourages dissemination of its work and hereby grants permission to users of this work to copy portions for their personal, noncommercial use, without any right to resell, redistribute or create derivative works there from. Any other copying or use of this work requires the express written permission of the International Finance Corporation. For permission to photocopy or reprint, please send a request with complete information to: The International Finance Corporation c/o the World Bank Permissions Desk Office of the Publisher 1818 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20433 All queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to: The International Finance Corporation c/o the Office of the Publisher World Bank 1818 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20433 Fax: (202) 522-2422 Who’s Running the Company? A guide to reporting on corporate governance Global Corporate Governance Forum and the International Center for Journalists FOREWORD To report professionally, business journalists today independent information beyond what companies provide need a solid understanding of how modern companies to be effective in rectifying wrongdoing.
    [Show full text]
  • 172 Satyam Scam: Lessons for Corporate Governance
    IJRESS Volume 2, Issue 12(December 2012) (ISSN 2249-7382) Satyam scam: Lessons for Corporate Governance * Dr Vijay prakash **Monika Srivastava ABSTRACT The Satyam scandal dubbed as India’s Enron is one of the largest accounting frauds in the country’s corporate history. B.Ramalinga Raju, founder and chairman of Satyam Computer Services Ltd., the fourth leading IT services firm, declared on January 7, 2009 that his company had been faking its accounts for years, exaggerating revenues and overstating profits by $1billion. This article examines the Satyam scandal and explains what happened, why and who is to blame. Satyam’s emergence from a local to a global traded conglomerate is traced, followed by the events in the aftermath of the scandal. The paper concludes with the proposed regulatory prescriptions encapsulated by the new code created by India’s Ministry of Corporate Affairs, with suggestions proposed by the Parliamentary Standing Committee. These prescriptions are likely to be introduced in the impending Budget session of Parliament .They relate to the functioning of independent directors, enhanced pace of disclosures, conduct of audit and improved transparency in governance mechanisms. Keywords: Corporate Governance, Satyam Computer Services Ltd., Price Waterhouse, scandal Introduction By Ramalinga Raju , founder and chairman of Satyam Computer Services Ltd., saying publicly on January 7 2009, that his firm had been misrepresenting revenues and overstating profits by $1billion,is a case of corporate mis-governance and accounting malpractice. Specifically, Ramalinga Raju(Raju) admitted that Satyam’s balance sheet included .7,136 crore(almost $1.5billion) in non-existent cash and bank balances, accumulated interest and misstatements.
    [Show full text]