Confidentiality Agreement FAR Provision Does Not Permit Employee Theft
Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.13.17
Crowell & Moring attorneys David Robbins and Trina Fairley Barlow published an article entitled “FAR Confidentiality Rule Doesn’t Authorize Employee Theft” that dispels common myths about the FAR’s confidentiality agreement provisions at 3.909 and the related contract clauses at FAR 52.203-18 and -19. Although purported whistleblowers are more commonly arguing they are entitled to take contractor documents in support of an enforcement proceeding, this article explains why such arguments are well beyond the scope of the regulation and suggests ways to respond if such a situation arises.
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 03.28.24
UK Government Seeks to Loosen Third Party Litigation Funding Regulation
On 19 March 2024, the Government followed through on a promise from the Ministry of Justice to introduce draft legislation to reverse the effect of R (on the application of PACCAR Inc & Ors) v Competition Appeal Tribunal & Ors [2023] UKSC 28. The effect of this ruling was discussed in our prior alert and follow on commentary discussing its effect on group competition litigation and initial government reform proposals. Should the bill pass, agreements to provide third party funding to litigation or advocacy services in England will no longer be required to comply with the Damages-Based Agreements Regulations 2013 (“DBA Regulations”) to be enforceable.
Client Alert | 6 min read | 03.26.24
Client Alert | 11 min read | 03.26.24
Client Alert | 6 min read | 03.21.24
Federal District Court Rules Corporate Transparency Act Unconstitutional