On 2 November 2021, news broke that a 6-year investigation in Switzerland has culminated in Sepp Blatter (ex-FIFA president) and Michel Platini (ex-UEFA President) being charged with fraud and other offences relating to a controversial payment of 2m Swiss francs (circa £1.35m).
Following Charity Fraud Awareness Week 2021 [1] , we felt it important to provide guidance about the role of Charity Trustees. A trustee of a charity is a custodian of that charity and legally responsible for the proper use of charity funds. They have legal duties under charity law to safeguard charity assets. In circumstances where the charity sector is seeing an increase in fraud, it is therefore, becoming even more essential for trustees to take steps to protect their charity and its assets from fraud.
In a recent article for CICM magazine, Tenet founder – Arun Chauhan discussed the impact of fraud on creditworthiness and liquidity. In that article, Arun also assessed the factors contributing to an increased risk of fraud during the pandemic. Indeed, the key factor driving an individual to commit fraud is pressure, and there has certainly been enough of that felt both during the pandemic and beyond. At a time when many financial schemes are coming to an end, and the UK is facing an uncertain winter with increased household bills and cuts to universal credit, what can businesses do to protect themselves from fraud?
New Food has published an article by Tenet in which Arun Chauhan and Esther Phillips analyse the legal issues behind the recent Subway fake tuna scandal. Tenet considers the factual basis of the claim, the limitations of DNA testing, the requirements of bringing a fraudulent misrepresentation claim in the UK and the wider impact of this case on the food industry.
Welcome to the first edition of our bi-monthly newsletter – specifically focused on the prevention and protection against fraud for the food sector. As a professional within the food industry you will be aware of the growing concern and complexity of law around adulterated food and the impact this is having on both businesses and consumers. In each issue we provide articles to assist with your fraud prevention planning, advice on protecting brand integrity and recommendations to improve quality control – all from a legal perspective. While you are welcome to unsubscribe at any time we hope you will look forward to our monthly newsletters where we share our legal insight and experiences on the issues currently affecting our clients in your market.
On 23rd June 2021, it was World Whistleblowing Day. There is much to celebrate with a noticeable shift in global attitudes towards whistleblowing and those who lift the lid on criminal or unethical conduct thanks to movements such as the #MeToo movement. However, in an online poll conducted by Tenet Compliance & Litigation, an incredible 93% of respondents stated that they still thought becoming a whistleblower would impact their career. So, what is it about whistleblowing that makes people so fearful?
There is no “one size fits all” when it comes to ways to argue and seek the Court’s assistance in fraud claims. This is largely due to the fact that the umbrella term “fraud” covers a wide variety of possible causes of action and different remedies available depending upon the nature of the claim itself. This broad menu of both causes of action and remedies allows the courts to be flexible in terms of the way that fraud is dealt with.
Indeed, where there is a pleading of fraud there is often a greater scope for recoverable damages and the courts may take a more expansive approach to loss. Two recent cases provide clarity on common remedies in fraud, namely damages for fraudulent misrepresentation and an account of profits.
Historically, where a claimant pleaded fraud, they were not entitled to make an application for summary judgment. The reason for this so called “fraud exception” was that due to the serious nature of the allegations and consequences of such, it would be inappropriate for such matters to be determined at an interim stage without defendants being afforded the opportunity to fully explore the issues at trial. This exception was abolished in England and Wales in 1992, and yet it has remained difficult to meet the threshold for summary judgment in fraud cases.
We’ve all heard of Bitcoin, but for a long time the concept of a “cryptocurrency” seemed to belong to another world, the online world, and was something far removed from day-to-day life. In recent years, cryptocurrencies have crept further and further into the real world with Mastercard announcing plans to support cryptocurrency payments on its network this year, and a number of traditional banks planning to welcome Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, eventually treating them like any other asset.
The Court of Appeal has recently upheld an appeal by HSBC against a High Court ruling which refused to strike out a claim against it for breach of its Quincecare duty when it unwittingly got caught up in a Ponzi scheme. The decision limits the scope of the Quincecare duty and will be welcomed by financial institutions.