Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 20 MARCH 2015

Will Judicial Scrutiny Of DPAs Become A New Trend?

De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek
De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek
Contributor
De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek

De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek

Our clients are increasingly operating in South-East Asia and require legal assistance in the...

View firm profile
Explore more from De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek

On 5 February 2015, a US federal judge refused to approve a settlement between the US government and Dutch aerospace firm Fokker on grounds of "disproportionality".

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

On 5 February 2015, a US federal judge refused to approve a settlement between the US government and Dutch aerospace firm Fokker on grounds of "disproportionality". According to the judge, Fokker had exported US-origin aircraft parts, technologies and services to controversial regimes such as Iran, Sudan and Burma. This was a violation of the US International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The judge did not accept the Deferred Prosecution Agreement in its current form, but indicated that he would be open to considering a modified version. This new development indicates that voluntary reporting of irregularities to US authorities is a delicate process with some unexpected twists.

As reported previously in In context, the US Department of Justice (DoJ) and Fokker Services B.V. entered into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) in June 2014. Fokker Services self-disclosed, cooperated with the authorities, and accepted all responsibility for its actions. Under the

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from