Competition law: inaction is no longer an option

The Office of Fair Trading has made a new statement concerning competition law. This statement says that directors who should have been aware of their company’s breach of competition law now face the same disqualification risk as directors who have actively participated in the breach. The statement is not new but the Office of Fair Trading will now make active use of it as part of its enforcement armoury.

It applies to any breach of competition law, unlike the second sanction: the cartel offence can entail up to five years’ imprisonment and unlimited fines for any employee. Both sanctions can be applied at the same time.
They make use of that because imposing financial and other penalties on companies are not enough deterred.

The Office of Fair Trading must follow a certain procedure to disqualify a director. They must apply to the High Court for an order, on the basis that the individual is incapable to be a director. The order may disqualify the director from directorship of any company for up to 15 years.

The Office of Fair Trading will also consider mitigating circumstances, such as quick remedial action and if they know whether the activity constituted a breach or not.
All company directors are expected to appreciate the importance of competition law compliance and to know that price-fixing, market sharing and bid rigging are likely to breach competition law.

It seems to me that the Office of Fair Trading is very hard on the directors who didn’t participate in the breach of competition law. I think that it goes to far when the directors who didn’t do anything are punished in the same way as the directors who participated in the breach. They have to give them a lower fine so that they take more responsibility.

http://www.hvnplus.co.uk/intelligence/regulation/competition-law-inaction-is-no-longer-an-option/8605694.article

Laborer bullied and humiliated in Belgian factory

A laborer from Mactac has been humiliated for 9 years by his colleagues. The humiliations and teasing were incredible. He was bound on a wooden platform while a colleague smashed his genitalia against his face. Another day he was locked up in a cage, he was overwhelmed by kilos of talcum powder. After this the colleagues cleaned his body with a high pressure cleaner.

In 2002 he told the direction about the bullying. He got a few images from the security camera and gave them to the direction. The offenders are clearly recognizable.

The tribunal from Bergen says that the facts are statute barred because the victim made a complaint in 2008, that’s five years after the last bullying.
The company had offered psychological help and a transfer to the victim. Twenty five employees are suspicious. In January it will be clear whether the suspects will have to appear in court or not. They risk an imprisonment of 5 years. The lawyer also wants to pursue the suspects for torturing because the facts were very cruel. The victim can also start a lawsuit to obtain damages from the suspects.

I was shocked when I saw the pictures and the images on the internet. This is really over the top, I didn’t know this could happen in Belgium. I keep on asking why nobody helped this man or why he didn’t told the direction earlier about the bullying. I hope that other employees who are handled in the same way have the strength to talk about it with the direction or someone they trust.
Now jurists doubt if the perpetrators will be punished, but I hope they will.

Tine Depotter


Source: http://www.nieuwsblad.be/article/detail.aspx?articleid=DMF20101118_062

Five years imprisonment demanded against child care who tortured a baby

In ‘Leuven’ the public prosecutor demanded 5 years imprisonment for the nursery that tortured a baby so long that he is disabled for the rest of his life.

The case against the nursery E.A. (24) started with a lot of interest. The woman is committed to trial for the molestation of Emmanuel Tuts and Lila S. (both 18 months old) in her childcare in Kessel-Lo in 2009.

The judge wanted to know why the defendant didn’t anything when she noticed that Emmanuel Tuts got convulsions, probably because she tortured him. She answered that she didn’t do anything because the parents of Emmanuel called her.

The psychiatric investigations showed that the young lady wasn’t able to have a childcare. She also said that in her education she never handled baby’s who cried a lot. She didn’t know how to comfort the baby.

The 4 months old baby showed after the molestation indications of the ‘babyshakensyndrome’ and the nursery did her confessions.

The now one and a half year boy is blind. He will probably never walk and he is fed with a drip. The child is disabled for 80%. It is already the fourth nursery that is summoned because of molestation of a child.

I think this case is really scandalous. Many people bring their children to a child care and they trust the nursery that she take care for the kids. The mother of Emmanuel didn’t get pregnant easily, suddenly she was pregnant of a healthy baby and then this happens… I think that is really the worst nightmare you could go through. The kid needs a lot of help for the rest of his life. I think that I would never accept that this could happen.

http://www.standaard.be/artikel/detail.aspx?artikelid=DMF20101123_089&word=rechtbank

Chipmakers fined by EU for price-fixing

This article is about nine chip makers who have been fined by the European Union regulators for illegally fixing prices. The involved companies are Samsung, Hynix, Infineon, NEC, Hitachi, Mitsubishi, Toshiba, Elpida and Nanya. There was also another company involved, namely Micron. That company has alerted the competition authorities and doesn’t have to pay a fine.

Between 1998 and 2002, the ten companies were operating with a network of contacts to share secret information with each other. They were setting prices for DRAM chips. These chips were sold to major PC makers and server manufacturers.

Samsung has to pay 146 million euros, that’s the biggest fine. The second biggest fine was for Infineon, who has to pay 57 million euros.

All the companies received a 10 % reduction because they admitted that they were involved in the cartel.

Only Infineon is situated in the EU, but the EU’s anti-trust regulator said that all the companies were penalized because they sell their products in the European Economic Area and therefore they were a subject to EU law, which bans practices that restrict competition.

I think that it’s good that all the companies have been fined, although they aren’t situated in the EU. They were operating in the European Economic Area, so they need to follow the European Law. Price-fixing isn’t fair towards the other competitors. In this case, a lot of big companies were forming a cartel, so the little companies who were also producing DRAM chips were very disadvantaged.

Kimberley Prinsier
3RP2

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10126755

Judge questions father's kidnap charge

In July Kevin Moore a 44-year-old man from Saltburn, Cleveland took a teenager to apologize to a group of children, including his two sons, for acting in a violate and aggressive way.

He followed the 13-year-old boy and put him in his car before driving him for a short distance to a church hall where the younger children were attending a dance class.
Both groups of children apologized after the row, which had started because of an incident about name-calling and throwing berries in the church. The teenager, who had not hit anyone, returned to his friends.
An adult called the police because he had seen Kevin Moore with the 13-year-old boy and he suspected the child was being abducted. The boy, who seemed upset when being forced to get into the car, was not related to the defendant. The police arrested Kevin Moore and he was charged with kidnapping as there was evidence that he took a 13-year-old boy into his car against the will of the boy. Kidnap carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

A judge questioned why a father who grabbed an abusive teenager and made him apologize to younger children because of a conflict was charged with kidnapping the youth.
Judge Bowers didn’t believe it because this was not what anyone would really call a kidnapping and she asked the CPS to review the case. Two hearings later, Moore's plea to the less serious charge was esteemed acceptable.

It seems to me that the judge handled in a correct way because I also find it a bit over the top that they called it kidnapping. I think that the man had good intentions en he just wanted to teach the children something about apologizing to each other.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/judge-questions-fathers-kidnap-charge-2124384.html

Attacker forced victims to have sex and gets an imprisonment of 6 year

The Court of Appeal in Ghent sentenced a 49-years old man to 6 years imprisonment for cruel sexual offences and a robbery with violence.

In November 2009, two boys were threatened by a 25-year old man and his 49-years old friend. The facts took place in the ‘Citadelpark’ in Ghent. The youngest man had a knife and required the money and the mobile phones of the victims. Then he forced the boys to have oral sex with them. The victims also had to have sex with each other while the attackers were looking at them. At last the two victims of 19 years old had to go to a cash point where the perpetrators plundered their accounts.

The 25-years old man got an imprisonment of 8 years in the first instance, but he didn’t give notice of appeal. The other offender asked a reduced sentence but he didn’t get it. The Court confirmed the 6 years imprisonment and give him a detention during Her Majesty's plea of ten years .

I really think that is a frightening case. Maybe you think that it can’t happen with you but that isn’t true. The ‘citadelpark’ isn’t far away and I heard already some things that happened there but I didn’t believe everything. With this case I realize how dangerous the ‘Citadelpark’ is at night. I would never walk in it alone or with some friends when it is dark. It must be traumatic for the victims to go that true. The perpetrators must be punished with a very severe sentence. I hope that it doesn’t happen in the future anymore.

Camille Vandewalle

3RP2

http://www.hln.be/hln/nl/957/Belgie/article/detail/1180856/2010/11/09/Overvaller-dwong-slachtoffers-tot-seks-en-krijgt-6-jaar-cel.dhtml

Man in disguise boards international flight

On October 29, a young Asian man succeeded to get on a plane from Honkong to Vancouver, but he didn’t check in with his own identity. He was disguised as an old, Caucasian male, he probably used the boarding pass from another passenger.

On the plane, the man who was sitting next to the Asian, noticed that the ‘older man’ had very young hands, so he thought it was suspicious. During the flight, the Asian man went to the washroom and he came back without his disguise. At that point, the security service of Canada Airlines got the information that there was a swindler on board.

After the landing of the plain in Canada, the Border Services Officers, escorted the man of the plain. The man proceeded to make a claim for refugee protection.

The security services of Canada Airlines are now investigating this strange case. It is certain that there has been going something very wrong during the passport control.

To my opinion, it is alarming that it is possible to get on a plane disguised in another person. Fortunately, nothing bad happened during this flight but it could have been a terrorist who tried to blow up the plane. I think it is strange that this could happen because I think that a plane is the most secured way to travel.  

Kimberley Prinsier
3RP2

Source:

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/americas/11/04/canada.disguised.passenger/index.html?hpt=C1

Scottish teachers face “emotional damage” from online abuse

The Education Institute of Scotland (EIS) is a teaching union. They receive around 60 complaints a year from teachers who are suffering some form of online bullying or abuse of students. It happens a lot that teachers are victims of such abuse.

The Union wants the social networking sites to be responsible for the content of the site. Insulting messages in online spaces can cause a lot of emotional damage. The site holders are now liable for this kind of messages. The EIS promised to support teachers who want to pursue a complaint under the new legislation.

The site holders argue that the big volume of content of the site makes it impossible to check all the published items. They have clear terms of use and the users can inform the site holders when there is a potential problematic comment, so they can remove those items.

I think it is good that the site holders are liable for the insulting messages, because they are are the only people who can remove the messages. If the site holders know that they are liable for abuse or bullying, they will be more careful and they will check what kind of messages appears on their site. The problem is even more problematic. Not only teachters suffer from online abuse, it is a big problem nowadays and it causes a lot of emotional damage. We should think first before posting something on the internet. People who post insulting messages have to be punished.

Tine Depotter
www.journalonline.co.uk/News/1008810.aspx