- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Fwd: FOIL request
by Gunnar Larson 28 Dec '23

28 Dec '23

No records on the teacher's pension fund money gone missing at the New York Division of the Budget... God bless them. They said xNY.io - Bank.org should visit the New York City Comptroller. Gunnar ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: dob.sm.foil <foil(a)budget.ny.gov> Date: Fri, Dec 22, 2023, 4:23 PM Subject: FOIL request To: G(a)xny.io <G(a)xny.io> Please see the attached related to your FOIL request.

1 0

Nigeria Seeks Control of Banks Linked to Ex Central Banker - Bloomberg
by Gunnar Larson 26 Dec '23

26 Dec '23

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-12-23/nigeria-to-buy-banks-pur… Nigeria is seeking control of two banks that a probe initiated by President Bola Tinubu alleges were bought at a major discount by former Central Bank Governor Godwin Emefiele using proxies. “We have completed our investigation on this acquisition and we are on the verge of recovering these two banks for the Federal Government,” a report by a special investigator said.

1 0

Elon Musk’s X, accused of withholding bonuses promised to staff, will have to face a court battle | CNN Business
by Gunnar Larson 26 Dec '23

26 Dec '23

https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/25/tech/x-bonus-lawsuit/index.html New York CNN — A federal judge has ruled that X, formerly Twitter, must face a lawsuit after staff accused the company of failing to pay bonuses promised to them. The judge on Friday denied X’s motion to dismiss the case. X stands accused of failing to pay out annual bonuses to staff after its October 2022 acquisition by billionaire Elon Musk – despite repeated assurances from executives in the lead-up to and following the deal that the company would do so, according to a lawsuit filed in June 2023 on behalf of employees. The lawsuit was filed in a San Francisco federal court by Mark Schobinger, who was a senior director of compensation at X until he left the company in May. The suit is seeking class action status for former and current X employees who did not receive their 2022 bonus.

1 0

Goldman’s Painful 2023 Lesson on China Forces Rethink of Emerging Markets
by Gunnar Larson 26 Dec '23

26 Dec '23

Goldman’s Painful 2023 Lesson on China Forces Rethink of Emerging Markets https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-12-26/goldman-s-painful-2023-l… Goldman Sachs Group Inc.’s head of global currency, rates and emerging-markets strategy says he’s learned two main lessons from one of the biggest — and most-common — bad calls of 2023: the bet on post-pandemic China’s reopening boom.

1 0

How to Dispose of Christmas Trees, Lights and Other Holiday Staples
by Gunnar Larson 26 Dec '23

26 Dec '23

How to Dispose of Christmas Trees, Lights and Other Holiday Staples https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-12-26/how-to-dispose-of-your-c… The holidays are a special time of joy and giving — and a special time for generating trash.

1 0

How Were So Many Economists So Wrong About the Recession?
by Gunnar Larson 26 Dec '23

26 Dec '23

How Were So Many Economists So Wrong About the Recession? https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2023-12-26/what-recession-how-so… Last year at this time, 85% of economists in one poll predicted a recession this year — and that was an optimistic take compared to the 100% probability of a recession forecast two months earlier. Meanwhile US Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, drawing upon the work of his highly able staff, expressed fear in March that bringing down the rate of inflation would cost millions of American jobs.

1 0

Ethiopia Fails to Pay Coupon, Becoming Latest African Defaulter - Bloomberg
by Gunnar Larson 26 Dec '23

26 Dec '23

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-12-25/ethiopia-fails-to-pay-co… Ethiopia became Africa’s latest defaulter after it failed to make an interest payment following the end of a grace period on Monday. The Horn of Africa nation had to pay a $33 million coupon on Dec. 11. The government didn’t want to make the payment because it “wants to treat all creditors in the same way,” Ahmed Shide, Ethiopia’s minister of finance said on state TV on Thursday. Hinjat Shamil, senior reform advisor at the Ministry of Finance confirmed Monday that the payment had not, and will not be paid. Ethiopia reached an agreement with bilateral creditors last month to suspend debt payments.

1 0

The DOJ Took More than Two Years to Answer a FOIA on Its Criminal Division Head; Three Days Before Christmas 2023 We Got a Troubling Disclosure
by Gunnar Larson 26 Dec '23

26 Dec '23

https://wallstreetonparade.com/2023/12/the-doj-took-more-than-two-years-to-… The DOJ Took More than Two Years to Answer a FOIA on Its Criminal Division Head; Three Days Before Christmas 2023 We Got a Troubling Disclosure By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: December 26, 2023 ~ Kenneth A. Polite Kenneth Polite On July 20, 2021 the U.S. Senate voted 56-44 to confirm Kenneth Polite (pronounced Po-leet) to head the most powerful criminal law enforcement office in the United States, the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. The vetting of this candidate immediately raised red flags at Wall Street On Parade. Despite Polite owing more than $1.5 million in debts according to his financial disclosure form and public mortgage records; paying over 18 percent interest on an outstanding balance on a credit card; 19.99 percent interest on a personal loan; and then accepting a job where his income was going to be slashed by approximately 77 percent – not one Senator on the Senate Judiciary Committee asked a single question about Polite’s unusual financial obligations during his confirmation hearing on May 26, 2021. In addition, Polite was coming from the law firm of Morgan, Lewis & Bochius, which had plenty of red flags itself. Polite was a partner there earning approximately $877,500 in 2020. His job at the Justice Department was to pay less than $200,000 annually. Morgan, Lewis has, for decades, provided legal representation to the Wall Street mega banks. Polite’s financial disclosure form revealed that JPMorgan Chase was one of his clients over the prior 12 months. JPMorgan Chase is a recidivist lawbreaker on Wall Street with an unprecedented five felony counts brought by the Justice Department and admitted to by the bank. Having a recidivist felon that is the largest bank in the United States as a recent client and then moving into the job as a potential prosecutor of that bank is not good optics, so Polite signed an Ethics Agreement (EA) that read in part: “he will be required to recuse from particular matters involving specific parties involving his former employer or former clients for a period of two years after he is appointed….” During the time that Polite was ostensibly recusing himself from matters involving JPMorgan Chase, the Attorney General of the U.S. Virgin Islands brought a civil case in federal court in Manhattan against JPMorgan Chase for “actively participating” in Jeffrey Epstein’s international sex-trafficking ring where Epstein and his wealthy pals were sexually assaulting underage girls. According to documents released in the lawsuit, the bank was alleged to have laundered more than $5 million in hard cash for Epstein over the span of a decade without filing the legally-required Suspicious Activity Reports with law enforcement. In addition, various employees of the bank were making visits to Epstein’s Manhattan mansion where sexual assaults of minors were alleged to have occurred. The Criminal Division of the Justice Department has yet to bring a criminal case against JPMorgan Chase for either willfully participating in and/or covering up Epstein’s crimes for more than a decade. (See our report: Former FBI Agent Prepared to Testify that JPMorgan Had Jeffrey Epstein Account for 28 Years – Not 15 Years – and “Impeded” Criminal Investigation of Epstein.) The number of red flags swirling about Polite’s vetting to become the top criminal cop in the United States and supervise a department of some 1400 prosecutors and staff, prompted Wall Street On Parade to file a Freedom of Information Act request for documents with the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) on July 26, 2021. We requested “all electronic correspondence from November 6, 2020 through July 20, 2021 that relates to the nomination or confirmation or vetting of Kenneth A. Polite for the position of Assistant Attorney General at the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice.” We received a response from OGE dated September 30, 2021, more than two months from the date of our inquiry. The cover letter said the OGE was “enclosing 96 pages of responsive records” subject to various redactions. The 96 records were anything but responsive. Most of the 96 pages were simply clerical emails between staff members that shed zero light on how all of the red flags on Polite’s financial disclosure form and work history had been ignored. The relevant documents, it turns out, were withheld and sent over to the Justice Department for more stalling. The OGE cover letter explained as follows: “In searching for responsive records, OGE located 58 (some partial) pages of records that originated at the Department of Justice. We are therefore sending these responsive materials, along with a copy of your request, to the Department of Justice…We are asking the Department of Justice to review the material and respond directly to you.” This past Friday, December 22, 2023 – more than two years after we first filed our FOIA, the Justice Department finally got around to looking at those 58 documents and sent us only a portion of those, with heavy redactions. One electronic document did, however, raise more deeply troubling concerns about how candidates for the U.S. Department of Justice are vetted. The email was from Cynthia (Cindy) K. Shaw, the Director of the Departmental Ethics Office at the Justice Department. Shaw noted in a previous email that she would be the “reviewer” working with the OGE in the vetting of Polite. But in this email dated April 14, 2021, Shaw appears to be seeking the opinion of the man being vetted as to whether her suggested wording of his Ethics Agreement might raise questions. (See document below. Redactions were made by the DOJ.) Internal DOJ Email Related to Kenneth Polite Is it the legitimate job of an ethics reviewer to make sure no questions are raised by others? After being put in charge of the Criminal Division under an understanding that he would recuse himself for two years in matters involving his prior clients at Morgan, Lewis & Bochius, Polite ended up resigning his position at the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice after just two years and two months in the job. Polite headed for another big paycheck at corporate law firm Sidley Austin, where he is the “global co-leader of Sidley’s White Collar Defense and Investigations practice.” Polite, like so many before him, has gone from head honcho in the top federal division mandated to root out and prosecute criminals to dramatically elevating his income by defending corporate executives against government-alleged crimes. There is now no Senate-confirmed head of the Criminal Division of the DOJ. The woman Polite hired in May of 2022 to be his Chief of Staff, Nicole Argentieri, has stepped into the role of acting head of the Criminal Division. Immediately prior to joining the Justice Department, Argentieri had been a partner in the White Collar Defense & Corporate Investigations department at corporate law firm O’Melveny & Myers.

1 0

So, You Thought Your Arbitration Agreement Was Bulletproof: Beware Of Traps That Can Render Arbitration Agreements Unenforceable - Arbitration & Dispute Resolution - United States
by Gunnar Larson 26 Dec '23

26 Dec '23

United States: So, You Thought Your Arbitration Agreement Was Bulletproof: Beware Of Traps That Can Render Arbitration Agreements Unenforceable: https://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/arbitration--dispute-resolution/1403716… 21 December 2023 by Douglas Lang Thompson Coburn LLP In a recent federal court case, Baker Hughes v. Dynamic Industries, the court decided even though the parties agreed to arbitrate, the agreement was unenforceable because the arbitration agency was "abolished." In that case, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana denied a motion to compel arbitration where the Dubai-based arbitration agency designated to administer it no longer existed. However, the record showed when Dubai decreed the designated agency was "abolished," it transferred the assets, rights, and obligations of the dissolved agency to another Dubai entity. Also, the language of the transfer stated "DIFC-LCIA arbitration agreements entered into before the effective date of [the decree] are deemed valid." The plaintiff refused to arbitrate because the designated forum no longer exists. The Court agreed the arbitration agreement was unenforceable, citing several prior Fifth Circuit decisions including one where the court refused to enforce an arbitration agreement because the forum no longer administered the type of claim involved. Also, the court relied on a case in which a court refused to compel arbitration where one party sought to hold the arbitration in Mississippi because the agreed upon Iranian forum was deemed unsafe for the litigants. Specifically, in this Baker Hughes case, the Court concluded arbitration would not be compelled because whatever similarity the original agency DIAC may have with the new agency DIFC LCIA, "it is not the same forum in which the parties agreed to arbitrate." The case is likely to be appealed to the Fifth Circuit. Points to consider regarding the decision The ruling appears to be in conflict with the "liberal federal policy favoring arbitration" cited in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion. The ruling did not expressly consider the federal court's authority to appoint arbitrators under the Federal Arbitration Act. Also, the court did not consider whether it was important that the rules of arbitration for the dissolved forum, the rules of the London Court of Arbitration, were likely preserved when Dubai transferred to the DIAC, "the assets, rights and obligations" of the DIFC LCIA and the transfer decree stated "DIFC-LCIA arbitration agreements entered into before the effective date of [the decree] are deemed valid." The court did not expressly consider the location of the forum remained in Dubai. Lessons for drafting One should consider at least the following: Expressly state in the arbitration clause that should the designated arbitration agency no longer exist when arbitration is to be compelled, the court shall exercise its authority to appoint arbitrators "if for any ... reason" arbitrators are not otherwise appointed to serve, as outlined intheFederal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C. § 5). Expressly state that if the location designated for the arbitration cannot be used, another designated location is identified.

1 0

Radical Changes In Interlocutory Proceedings In Cyprus - Court Procedure - Cyprus
by Gunnar Larson 26 Dec '23

26 Dec '23

Cyprus: Radical Changes In Interlocutory Proceedings In Cyprus 22 December 2023 by Christiana Pyrkotou <https://www.mondaq.com/home/redirect/1209506?mode=author&article_id=1404504…> and Aimilia Efstathiou <https://www.mondaq.com/home/redirect/1680448?mode=author&article_id=1404504…> Elias Neocleous & Co LLC Your LinkedIn Connections <https://www.mondaq.com/Home/LinkedinReferal/1078?lcompany=17974723&author_i…> with the authors [image: View Christiana Pyrkotou Biography on their website] <https://www.mondaq.com/home/redirect/1209506?mode=author&article_id=1404504…> Article 32 of the Courts of Justice Law, L. 14/1960, which governs the jurisdiction of civil Courts to issue interlocutory orders, has been recently amended by the L. 114(Ι)/2023, introducing radical changes in this field. In essence, the recent amendments have notably widened the jurisdiction of the Courts to issue interlocutory orders. According to the amending law, the Courts have jurisdiction to hear an application for interlocutory proceedings any time, including the time before the filing of the claim or following the issuance of a judgment in relation to judicial or arbitral proceedings that took place, are taking place, or are going to take place, within or out of the jurisdiction. Furthermore, as far as it concerns the power of the Court to grant interlocutory orders in aid of judicial or arbitral proceedings, the Court has jurisdiction where the respondent is within the jurisdiction, or the property that constitutes the subject matter of the remedy sought is located within the jurisdiction, or where there is such a link with Cyprus rendering the court appropriate to hear and decide the interlocutory application. Before the amendment of the law, the advancement of an application seeking interlocutory proceedings was not possible in the absence of an underlying claim. There has been established case law providing that an application for interlocutory order is filed where there is an actionable right for remedy and that an interim order does not constitute by itself an actionable right. An interlocutory order is ancillary to a substantial claim that is advanced within the context of an action according to the old English decision in *T**he* *Siskina*1 . In *The Siskina* it was stressed that the right to an interlocutory order does not constitute a standalone actionable right, it is not a free-standing right and, as such, it depends on an existing actionable right. At this point it is noted that the approach taken in *The Siskina* has been eroded by legislative amendments in the UK. Similarly, in Cyprus the latest amendment of the Courts of Justice law constitutes a legislative departure from the previous approach, something that is also illustrated in Part 25 of the new civil procedure rules providing that applications for interlocutory orders may be filed, under certain circumstances, before the filing of a claim or after the issuance of the judgment. Additionally, before the latest amendment, it was not possible to obtain an interlocutory order in aid of judicial proceedings pending abroad (apart from the EU) in the absence of a bilateral or a multilateral convention. The possibility to issue an interlocutory order in aid of arbitration proceedings, though, was already available in Cyprus legal system under article 9 of the International Arbitration Law, L.101/1987.2 Despite the fact that the discretion of the Cyprus Courts to issue interlocutory injunctions was wide even before this amendment, the Courts have repeatedly stated that this discretion is exercised within the limits prescribed by the law and, thus, in the absence of a statutory provision, the possibility to issue interlocutory orders in aid of judicial proceedings was limited only in aid of proceedings pending before the Courts of the member states of the European Union pursuant to article 35 of the EU Regulation 1215/2012, as well as in instances where the Republic of Cyprus has entered into an international convention for judicial assistance in this respect.3 In all other instances of foreign judicial proceedings, the Cypriot Courts' approach was that there was no jurisdiction to issue interlocutory orders. Considering the range of the recent amendments, the green light has been given to advance such interlocutory applications at any time and in aid of judicial proceedings wherever these are taking place (provided of course that all statutory elements are met). It could be said that the recent amendments of the Courts of Justice Law aim to modernize the legal system of Cyprus providing further flexibility considering not only the developments of the common law case law, but also the societal changes, such as the ease and speed with which money and other financial assets can be moved around the world, the globalisation of commerce and economic activity and consequent growth of litigation and arbitration with international dimensions as well as the growth and use of offshore companies.4 Having said that, it remains to be seen how the Cyprus Courts will approach the newly added legislative possibilities and whether the pre-existing case law will set boundaries in further developments. Footnotes 1 The Siskina [1979] AC 210 2 Attorney General of the Republic of Kenya ν. Bank Fur Arbeit and Wirtschaft A.G. (1999) 1 C.L.R. 585, Commerzbank Auslandbanken Holding A.G. a.o. ν. Adeona Holdings Ltd, Civil Appeal no. Ε6/2014, 27.2.2015. 3 Volodimir Spilnichenko ν. ANGILERI INVESTMAENTS LTD a.o., Action no. 5652/15, 31/3/2017, CLOSED JOINT-STOCK INVESTMENT COMPANY FINANSOVY DOM ν. UFS CAPITAL LIMITED a.o., Action no. 4480/15, 19/5/2016 4 Broad Idea International Ltd (Respondent) v Convoy Collateral Ltd (Appellant) (British Virgin Islands) [2021] UKPC 24. ----- https://www.mondaq.com/cyprus/court-procedure/1404504/radical-changes-in-in…

1 0