Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Extraterritoriality and Whistleblower Retaliation
Though whistleblower protection statutes take many forms, the frameworks for determining liability are really quite similar. Generally speaking, an employee must first demonstrate that he or she engaged in protected conduct under an act. Next, the employee may be required to prove that the employer actually knew about the employee's protected conduct. Third, the employer must take some sort of adverse personnel action against the employee. Finally, the employee must demonstrate that his or her protected conduct was causally related to the adverse employment action.
In-house counsel for multinational corporations and counsel for foreign plaintiffs often must deal with an even more preliminary issue than any of those cited above. Specifically, can overseas whistleblowers avail themselves of United States whistleblower protection laws? If so, under what circumstances? How can corporations protect themselves against claims of retaliation from company whistleblowers located outside the United States? An answer one way or the other may render meaningless arguments about, for example, whether an employee's conduct should be deemed protected or the appropriate causation standard to be applied. Indeed, understanding the extraterritoriality issues in international whistleblower cases is absolutely critical insofar as it may provide an avenue for defense counsel to seek a dismissal early in litigation.
Morrison v. National Australian Bank, Ltd.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.