Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

In the Courts

By Colleen Snow
October 01, 2018
|

Second Circuit Issues Ruling Against DOJ in United States v. Hoskins Appeal

In August, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) lost its appeal in United States v. Hoskins, No. 16-1010, — F.3d —-, 2018 WL 4038192 (2d Cir. Aug. 24, 2018). According to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, the case turned on the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and whether “a foreign national who never set foot in the United States or worked for an American company during the alleged scheme, may be held liable, under a conspiracy or complicity theory, for violating FCPA provisions targeting American persons and companies and their agents, officers, directors, employees, and shareholders, and persons physically present within the United States.” The Second Circuit continued: “In other words, can a person be guilty as an accomplice or a co-conspirator for an FCPA crime that he or she is incapable of committing as a principal?”

Officers, directors, employees, and shareholders of foreign companies are subject to the FCPA if they: are U.S. citizens, nationals, or residents; commit any act in furtherance of an FCPA while in the United States or by using the facilities of interstate commerce; or engage in conduct that violates the FCPA while acting as an agent of an entity or individual covered by the FCPA. Historically, the DOJ and U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission have pursued limited United States touch points as the jurisdictional basis for FCPA enforcement, including, for example, emailing, texting, and virtual participation in meetings from within the United States.

Hoskins, a citizen of the United Kingdom, was originally charged in 2013 for FCPA (and money laundering) violations in connection with hiring third parties to make illicit payments to government officials in Indonesia in order to secure a $118 million contract on behalf of Alstom. In addition to the agency theory of liability, the government alleged that, because Hoskins had the authority to approve and authorize corrupt payments — and did so by emailing and calling Alstom U.S. co-conspirators located in the United States — he could be guilty as a foreign national that aided and abetted FCPA violations. Based in France, Hoskins had not, however, physically traveled to the United States to facilitate the bribery scheme. Two years later, in 2015, the United States District Court in Connecticut held that Hoskins could not be prosecuted under the DOJ's jurisdictional theory and dismissed the FCPA charge against him. In affirming the lower court's ruling, the Second Circuit held that the government could proceed only by demonstrating that Hoskins acted as an agent of a “domestic concern” or was physically present in the United States. Accordingly, the Second Circuit, concluded that the text, structure, and legislative history of the FCPA meant that Hoskins, a non-United States resident, had not acted in furtherance of the bribery scheme while in the country.

The DOJ is continuing to pursue FCPA charges based on agency principles.

Colleen Snow, Mayer Brown

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • 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

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

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.

'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers Image

In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.

CoStar Wins Injunction for Breach-of-Contract Damages In CRE Database Access Lawsuit Image

Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

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.

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.