Sentences with phrase «as the bribery statute»

Not exact matches

They wrote that the McDonnell ruling did hold that exerting pressure on another public official to perform an official act qualifies as an official act under bribery statutes.

That ruling, reached six months after the Skeloses were convicted, significantly narrowed the definition of an «official act» as it applies to federal bribery statutes and found that, while the McDonnell case was «distasteful,» it did not rise to the level of public corruption.

Indeed, the jurisdictional reach of statutes such as the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act 1977 and the UK Bribery Act 2010 means that conduct in Asia is often at the heart of enforcement actions by UK and US authorities, making the rules of privilege in the UK and US particularly important to multinational corporates.

Optimally, federal statutes creating an agency or setting forth some comprehensive system of regulation should still contain criminal penalties - but only for more serious crimes, such as willful fraud, bribery, or reckless endangerment.

With regard to facilitation payments which the Bribery Act 2010 unequivocally classes as bribes (in contrast to the equivalent statute in the US), Alderman drew up a «six - stage solution» the effect of which was to suggest that they might be tolerated.

(1) extending negligent misrepresentation beyond «business transactions» to product liability, unprecedented in Texas; (2) ignoring multiple US Supreme Court decisions that express and implied preemption operate independently (as discussed here) to dismiss implied preemption with nothing more than a cite to the Medtronic v. Lohr express preemption decision; (3) inventing some sort of state - law tort to second - guess the defendant following one FDA marketing approach (§ 510k clearance) over another (pre-market approval), unprecedented anywhere; (4) holding that the learned intermediary rule does not apply whenever a defendant «compensates» or «incentivizes» physicians to use its products, absent any Texas state or appellate authority; (5) imposing strict liability on an entity not in the product's chain of sale, contrary to Texas statute (§ 82.001 (2)-RRB-; (6) creating a claim for «tortious interference» with the physician - patient relationship, again utterly unprecedented; (7) creating «vicarious» breach of fiduciary duty for engaging doctors to serve as expert witnesses in mass tort litigation also involving their patients, ditto; and (8) construing a consulting agreement with a physician as «commercial bribery» to avoid the Texas cap on punitive damages, jaw - droppingly unprecedented.

As taken out of context from a criminal commercial bribery statute, we were able to come up with the following general explanation as to what typically constitutes bribery: «Whoever corruptly offers, gives, or agrees to give directly or indirectly, any benefit, consideration, compensation, or reward to any agent or fiduciary of a person with the intent to influence the person's performance of duties as an agent is guilty of commercial bribery.&raquAs taken out of context from a criminal commercial bribery statute, we were able to come up with the following general explanation as to what typically constitutes bribery: «Whoever corruptly offers, gives, or agrees to give directly or indirectly, any benefit, consideration, compensation, or reward to any agent or fiduciary of a person with the intent to influence the person's performance of duties as an agent is guilty of commercial bribery.&raquas to what typically constitutes bribery: «Whoever corruptly offers, gives, or agrees to give directly or indirectly, any benefit, consideration, compensation, or reward to any agent or fiduciary of a person with the intent to influence the person's performance of duties as an agent is guilty of commercial bribery.&raquas an agent is guilty of commercial bribery.»