Skip to main content

Maritime Law-Chasing Whistleblower Bounties

In August, I spoke to the North American Maritime Ministries Association on the topic of Legal Issues Affecting Seafarers and Ship Operators in Whistleblower Scenarios. You can read more about NAMMA here => NAMMA. Since this presentation, I have been asked to opine on other sorts of whistleblower scenarios. I recently noted that the Securities and Exchange Commission has just obtained a record $14 million whistleblower bounty for an in-house counsel whistleblower against his own company, which certainly may have some in-house counsel wondering if they should squeal on their clients. 

The Corporate Counsel magazine on October 14th cites a growing number of in-house counsel and compliance officers filing whistleblower-related claims against their own companies. I find this a disturbing trend, as these cases present a host of issues not present in an ordinary whistleblower claim, such as the plaintiff’s use of privileged communications, attorney work product, and confidential client information. In my view, an in-house counsel claim leaves a company particularly vulnerable. However, it would appear that states are starting to enact ethics opinions directly addressing the growing concern. 

Corporate Counsel reports that the New York County Lawyers’ Association issued an ethics opinion stating that New York in-house or outside corporate counsel cannot ethically collect whistleblower bounties for providing confidential information about their clients to the SEC. In addition, a U.S. Supreme Court case earlier this year made it harder to prove that an employee was retaliated against for whistleblowing. The ruling required a stronger showing of causation from the plaintiff.

However, I could not find any such ethics  opinions issued here in Florida. If you know of one, please let me know where I can find it.  
 
Given the current status of whistleblower law, there may appear to be a narrowing trend in the U.S. for whistleblower plaintiffs. However elsewhere, the whistleblowing concept is gaining broader ground. The Financial Times has reported that the United Kingdom, which enacted a new whistleblower law this year, is now considering whether to begin paying U.S.-style whistleblower bounties.
 
So for those of you overseas, you will need to watch what we do over here!
 
If you are interested in receiving a copy of my Powerpoint presentation to NAMMA (as it addresses some of these concepts) or are interested in contacting me, you may do by writing to me at mov@chaloslaw.com.

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Maritime Law--Florida's Arbitration Code Is Now Revised

Those of us that practice maritime law regularly must always be on the lookout for the contract that may contain an arbitration clause. Thus, any laws related to arbitration are important to those of us practicing in this sector.       The Florida legislature has revised the Florida Arbitration Code ("FAC") and named it the Revised Florida Arbitration Code (the " Revised Act"). Since 1967, the FAC had gone mostly unchanged. The Revised Act addresses concepts that were not addressed in the old law, such as the ability of arbitrators to issue provision remedies, challenges based on notice, consolidation of separate arbitration proceedings, required conflict disclosures by arbitrators, among other major changes. The Revised Act lays out a detailed framework for international arbitration conducted under Florida law and repeals sections of the FAC. The Revised Act spells out what experienced arbitrators knew the case law to be, but codifies it all in one pl

Maritime Law--U.S. Crewmember Required to Arbitrate Claims Applying Norwegian Law

In Alberts v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd ., No. 15-14775 (11th Cir. Aug. 23, 2016), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that a U.S. citizen, working aboard a Royal Caribbean cruise ship is required to arbitrate his claims against Royal Caribbean. Plaintiff, a United States citizen, worked as the lead trumpeter on a passenger Royal Caribbean cruise ship. The ship is a Bahamian flagged vessel with a home port in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Royal Caribbean, the operator of the vessel, is a Liberian corporation with its principal place of business in Florida. After plaintiff became ill while working for Royal Caribbean, he filed suit alleging unseaworthiness, negligence, negligence under the Jones Act, maintenance and cure, and seaman’s wages and penalties. Royal Caribbean moved to compel arbitration, and the district court granted the motion. This appeal presented an issue of first impression: Whether a seaman’s work in international waters on a cruise ship

Maritime Law--Jury Hits Royal Caribbean Cruises With $20.3M Verdict for Officer's Hand Injury

In Spearman v. Royal Caribbean Cruises , Case No. 2011-023730-CA-01, a Miami-Dade County, Florida jury has awarded $20.3 million to a former crewmember of Royal Caribbean Cruises, whose hand was crushed while coming to the aid of a fellow worker during an emergency test in 2008. After a three-week trial, the jury found the Miami-based cruise company negligent in operating an unseaworthy ship and 100 percent liable for the injuries suffered by Lisa Spearman, who was working an officer on Royal Caribbean’s Voyager of the Seas . Spearman sued the company in 2011, three years after her right hand was caught in a watertight power door during a fire-safety drill. According to her lawyers, Spearman was trying to prevent the door from closing on the ship’s nurse when her hand was pulled into a recess pocket of the sliding door and crushed.  The nurse allegedly breached the company’s safety protocol when she stumbled through the door, prompting the response from Spearman. Accordin