We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 22,031

Halliburton II: the end of the fraud-on-the-market presumption?

  • Cohen & Gresser LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 17 2014

The U.S. Supreme Court heard argument March 5 in Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund Inc., a rare case in which the court will directly consider

SEC brings enforcement actions against two audit committee chairs

  • Baker & McKenzie
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 15 2014

During March, the SEC brought enforcement actions against the audit committee chairs of two public companies -- AgFeed Industries and L&L Energy. Both

Federal appeals court holds SEC conflict minerals rules violate free speech

  • Greenberg Traurig LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 15 2014

On April 14, 2014, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, in an opinion authored by Senior Circuit Judge

D.C. Circuit finds Conflicts Minerals Rules’ disclosure requirement unconstitutional; affirms district court’s decisions on de minimis exception, scope of application, and due-diligence trigger

  • Husch Blackwell LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 15 2014

Yesterday a panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals held the Conflict Minerals Rules' requirement that a company that issues stock disclose if its

Court declares partial victory for manufacturers in conflict minerals case

  • Husch Blackwell LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 15 2014

Yesterday a panel on the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, in National Association of Manufacturers v. SEC, held that one portion of the SEC's

Name and shame no more?

  • Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 15 2014

The last few years has seen the rise of so-called "name and shame" laws. The aims of many these laws may be laudable, but yesterday's decision by the

Conflict minerals rule weekly recap 73 April 4, 2014

  • Squire Sanders
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 14 2014

On April 7, 2014, the SEC issued a second set of FAQs on the conflict minerals rule which is presented as Frequently Asked Questions 13-21. Most of

Appellate Court issues opinion on Conflict Minerals Rule portions of District Court decision affirmed and portions reversed

  • Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 14 2014

Midday today, the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued its opinion in the challenge to the Conflict Minerals Rule. With one exception, the

SEC's conflict minerals rules struck down in part on First Amendment grounds

  • Cooley LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 14 2014

In October of last year, the National Association of Manufacturers, U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Business Roundtable filed a lawsuit asking the court

The SEC wants you to come clean

  • King & Spalding LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 14 2014

The Securities and Exchange Commission recently announced a new cooperation initiative to encourage issuers and underwriters of municipal securities