Search results

In a high‐profile case that first drew big media headlines last February, a New York brokerage firm and a ring of eight brokers on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange were charged with perpetrating a scheme in which they made over $11.1m in illegal profits and at the same time covered their tracks with an elaborate fraud.

This paper aims to examine the integration of lateral transshipment and road vulnerability into the humanitarian relief chain in light of affected area priority to address equitable distribution and assess the impact of various parameters on the total average inflated distance traveled per relief item.

After identifying comprehensive critical criteria and subcriteria, a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making framework was applied to obtain the demand points’ weight and ranking in a real-life earthquake scenario. Direct shipment and lateral transshipment models were then presented and compared. The developed mathematical models are formulated as mixed-integer programming models, considering facility location, inventory prepositioning, road vulnerability and quantity of lateral transshipment.

The study found that the use of prioritization criteria and subcriteria, in conjunction with lateral transshipment and road vulnerability, resulted in a more equitable distribution of relief items by reducing the total average inflated distance traveled per relief item.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is one of the first research on equity in humanitarian response through prioritization of demand points. It also bridges the gap between two areas that are typically treated separately: multi-criteria decision-making and humanitarian logistics.

This is the first scholarly work in Shiraz focused on the equitable distribution system by prioritization of demand points and assigning relief items to them after the occurrence of a medium-scale earthquake scenario considering lateral transshipment in the upper echelon.

The paper clarifies how to prioritize demand points to promote equity in humanitarian logistics when the authors have faced multiple factors (i.e. location of relief distribution centers, inventory level, distance, lateral transshipment and road vulnerability) simultaneously.

Investigates the differences in protocols between arbitral tribunals and courts, with particular emphasis on US, Greek and English law. Gives examples of each country and its way of using the law in specific circumstances, and shows the variations therein. Sums up that arbitration is much the better way to gok as it avoids delays and expenses, plus the vexation/frustration of normal litigation. Concludes that the US and Greek constitutions and common law tradition in England appear to allow involved parties to choose their own judge, who can thus be an arbitrator. Discusses e‐commerce and speculates on this for the future.

To analyze the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Liu v. SEC, where the Court confronted the issue of whether the SEC can obtain disgorgement in federal district court proceedings.

This paper provides an overview of the authors’ prior work analyzing courts’ treatment of SEC disgorgement and a summary of the background and opinion in Liu v. SEC. This article then focuses on the practical implications of Liu on SEC disgorgement by considering questions left open by the decision.

The Court in Liu held that the SEC is authorized to seek disgorgement as “equitable relief” as long as it “does not exceed a wrongdoer’s net profits and is awarded for victims.” But the Court left many unanswered questions, such as whether disgorged funds must always be returned to investors for disgorgement to be a permissible equitable remedy, whether the SEC can obtain joint-and-several disgorgement liability from unrelated co-defendants, what “legitimate expenses” should be deducted in disgorgement calculations, and to what extent the SEC can seek disgorgement in cases when victims are difficult to identify.

Original, practical guidance from experienced lawyers in financial services regulatory and enforcement practices, many of whom have previously worked in the SEC’s Division of Enforcement.

This paper aims to address a location-distribution-routing problem for distributing relief commodities during a disaster under uncertainty by creating a multi-stage model that can consider information updates during the disaster. This model aims to create a relief network that chooses distribution centers with the highest value while maximizing equity and minimizing response time.

A hybrid algorithm of adaptive large neighborhood search (ALNS) and multi-dimensional local search (MDLS) is introduced to solve the problem. Its results are compared to ALNS and an augmented epsilon constraint (AUGMECON) method.

The results show that the hybrid algorithm can obtain high-quality solutions within reasonable computation time compared to the exact solution. However, while it yields better solutions compared to ALNS, the solution is obtained in a little longer amount of time.

In this paper, the uncertain nature of some key features of the relief operations problem is not discussed. Moreover, some assumptions assumed to simplify the proposed model should be verified in future studies.

In order to verify the effectiveness of the designed model, a case study of the Sarpol Zahab earthquake in 2017 is illustrated and based on the results and the sensitivity analyses, some managerial insights are listed to help disaster managers make better decisions during disasters.

A novel robust multi-stage linear programming model is designed to address the location-distribution-routing problem during a disaster and to solve this model an efficient hybrid meta-heuristic model is developed.

This paper aims to explain the US Supreme Court’s ruling in Kokesh v. SEC, which limited the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) ability to seek the remedy of disgorgement and to examine how lower courts have applied the ruling to other types of equitable relief that that the SEC commonly pursues.

This study explains why the Supreme Court in Kokesh ruled that disgorgement is a “penalty” and that the five-year limitations period therefore was applicable to actions seeking disgorgement; discusses a footnote in Kokesh that left open the question of whether the SEC has the power to pursue disgorgement at all; and reviews four recent cases that grapple with the application of Kokesh to injunctions and lifetime bars.

Lower courts and the SEC have not settled on how Kokesh might impact equitable remedies commonly pursued by the SEC, but recent cases indicate that the effect of Kokesh may be broader than its narrow holding suggests.

Practical guidance from experienced white collar and regulatory defense lawyers that consolidates several recent developments in one piece.

In a previous monograph a discussion took place on stages one and part of stage two of the three stage process in an unfair dismissal action, namely the employee having to show that he has been dismissed (stage one), and some of the reasons for dismissal which fall within the statutory categories, namely the employee's capability and qualifications; misconduct and redundancy (part of stage two). In this monograph an analysis is proposed on the two remaining reasons, these being the contravention of a duty imposed by an enactment and some other substantial reason. There will then follow a discussion on the test of fairness as constituting the third of the three stage process and on the remedies available when the tribunal finds that the employee has been unfairly dismissed.

Knight's Industrial Law Reports goes into a new style and format as Managerial Law This issue of KILR is restyled Managerial Law and it now appears on a continuous updating basis rather than as a monthly routine affair.

Examines the situation in the UK in some detail with regard to three aspects of the Charter of Fundamental Human Rights of the European Union. Looks at the aims, together with an analysis and appraisal. Considers, first, information and consultation rights with regards to the transfer of undertakings and redundancies, followd by the right to collective action and, lastly, protection in the event of unjustifiable dismissal. Presents case law throughout as examples. Concludes that the UK has attempted to prevent social and economic rights for workers from being included in the final charter despite fierce opposition. Compares this view together with the UK suspicion of Europe against the views of the other member states.

To analyze the impact of recent legislation that amended the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to expressly empower the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to seek disgorgement in federal district court proceedings and to codify applicable statutes of limitations.

This article provides an overview of the authors’ prior work analyzing courts’ treatment of SEC disgorgement and summarizes how the scope of the remedy has evolved since Kokesh v. SEC (2017). Then, the article analyzes the changes to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 contained in Section 6501 the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which statutorily empowered the SEC to seek and obtain disgorgement in federal court actions. Finally, the authors discuss the impact of the legislation on the Supreme Court’s decisions in Kokesh and Liu v. SEC (2020).

The availability and appropriateness of SEC disgorgement have been the subject of vigorous debate. Just as courts began to iron out the contours of SEC disgorgement in the wake of Kokesh and Liu, Congress intervened by granting to the SEC explicit statutory authority to seek a remedy traditionally obtained at equity. In passing this legislation, Congress answered some questions that remained after Liu but also raised many new ones. These new questions will likely take years to resolve through subsequent litigation and potentially additional legislation.

Original, practical analysis and guidance from experienced lawyers in financial services regulatory and enforcement practices, many of whom have previously worked in the SEC’s Division of Enforcement.