1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |FCPA Enforcement Update – DOJ Arrests Four Individuals for Bribery Activities in Vietnam

FCPA Enforcement Update – DOJ Arrests Four Individuals for Bribery Activities in Vietnam

Client Alert | 1 min read | 09.10.08

Recent FCPA arrests demonstrate continued emphasis on prosecuting individuals. The Department of Justice announced last week the arrest and indictment of four individuals on charges that they and their company, Nexus Technologies, Inc., paid at least $150,000 in bribes to Vietnamese officials to obtain contracts to supply the Vietnamese government with technology and equipment, including underwater mapping equipment, bomb containment equipment, helicopter parts, chemical detectors, satellite communication parts, and air tracking systems. Nexus Technologies was also indicted and has not entered a plea or deferred prosecution agreement. The company, which is incorporated in Delaware and has offices in Philadelphia, New Jersey, and Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, is in the business of procuring equipment and consulting services for various sectors, including the petroleum, power generation, civil aviation, and maritime industries. The individual defendants were identified as Joseph Lukas, An Nguyen, Kim Nguyen, and Nam Nguyen, all of whom are U.S. citizens.

The charges consist of one count of conspiracy to bribe Vietnamese public officials in violation of the FCPA and four substantive counts of violating the FCPA. Each individual defendant, if convicted, could face five years in prison per count, and hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines, while Nexus Technologies could be fined $2 million for each count. The Department of Commerce’s Office of Export Enforcement is also investigating the matter for possible export control violations.

These indictments, which apparently are the first related to bribery in Vietnam, are the most recent example of relatively modest payments leading to significant consequences for both a company and its employees.

Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.13.26

Supreme Court Confirms Contractual Loss of Bargain Without Repudiatory Breach

English law has long treated the choice between terminating for repudiatory breach and exercising a contractual termination right as consequential. Under the Financings[1] causation principle, a party exercising a contractual right for a non-repudiatory breach could recover losses accrued to the date of termination — but nothing more. Loss of bargain was out of reach unless the breach went to the root of the contract. A practical workaround, confirmed in Lombard,[2] was to designate the relevant obligation as a condition, elevating any breach to repudiatory status, but that device carries significant strategic risk if the termination is later found to have been wrongful....