Article 2 of 4: Employee Fraud Series
Your company has received an allegation that one of its
employees has stolen from it and has now completed the steps
discussed in our first article –
Managing Corporate Risk When Employee Fraud is
Suspected. The company is satisfied the allegation has
merit and has preserved a forensic copy of the company s data.
So, what are the next steps?
This article will discuss the steps involved in conducting an
independent forensic investigation, preserving the company s
data and evidence, and obtaining remedies in court to protect the
company s interest pending a potential judgment against the
employee. We note that this article is focused on situations
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
Nicola Sharp of financial crime specialists Rahman Ravelli
believes new US legislation should reduce the chance of similar
offending.
Europol says it has dismantled an organised crime group that
defrauded more than 50 US banks out of an estimated $14.4M.
It has announced that, on one day last October, an international
operation led by Spanish police and the United States Secret
Service carried out 40 house searches, arrested 37 suspects, seized
13 luxury cars and froze 87 bank accounts. In total, the operation
– known as Operation Secreto - led to 88 house searches and
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
Barbados has moved up a notch in the recently released
Transparency International Corruption Perception Index (CPI) 2020
report. The jurisdiction has taken 1st place as the least corrupt
country within the Caribbean, 3rd place among the Latin American
and Caribbean countries and 29th globally among 180 countries.
The CPI scores these 180 countries and territories by their
perceived levels of public sector corruption, according to experts
and businesspeople. A scale from 0-100 is used, with 100 being very
clean and 0 being highly corrupt. Barbados received a score of 64
knowingly making the misrepresentations.
Under the
Limitations Act, 2002, a claim is
discovered when the person with the claim first knew or ought to
have known that the injury, loss or damage was caused by or
contributed to by an
act or omission (among certain
other criteria). As a claim necessarily involves a legal remedy,
the act or omission that must be discovered is one that will give
rise to a legal remedy,
i.e., a cause of action.
Therefore, the Court reasoned, in the case of a fraudulent
misrepresentation the act or omission that must have been
discovered is a misrepresentation
According to a
news report, a total of 5,697
cases of cyber fraud were reported to CyberSecurity Malaysia, the
national cyber security specialist and technical centre under the
purview of the Ministry of Communications and Multimedia Malaysia,
from January to August 2020.
While cyber fraud cases are often reported, it is not often that
the fraudster is actually caught and brought to justice. This is
unsurprising as the identity of the fraudster is often unknown and
victims may not know what recourse is available against an unknown
person.
All this will now change with the recent decision of the
Malaysian High Court in