Sixth Circuit Grants Extraordinary Relief in FirstEnergy Discovery Dispute

Recently, the Sixth Circuit said it would not reconsider its October 2025 ruling that affirmed the rule that the fruits of counsel’s investigations are protected under privilege, holding “there is no way to affirm the district court’s ruling [compelling production of withheld documents] without abandoning nearly a half century of jurisprudence concerning the scope of the attorney-client privilege and work-product doctrine.” In re FirstEnergy Corp., No. 24-3654 (quotation and citation omitted). The production at issue stemmed from internal investigations at FirstEnergy prompted by “an assortment of legal and regulatory actions” spun off from the high-profile corruption prosecution and conviction of former Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder. (For disclosure: Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP conducted an internal investigation on behalf of the board of directors.) For background, the Ohio General Assembly passed legislation in 2016 designed to bail out energy giant FirstEnergy from “dire financial straits.” United States v. Householder, 137 F.4th 454 (6th Cir. 2025). Speaker Householder accepted a hefty campaign bribe to see the legislation through—and the Sixth Circuit affirmed his conviction earlier this year. Id.

Complying with the EU’s Forced Labor Regulation: Compliance Obligations for Business

By Marion Seranne, Thomas Delille and Adèle Bourgin on December 2, 2025 Posted in Compliance Program, Corporate compliance, EU, France, General, Germany, Government Investigation, Italy

The EU’s new Forced Labor Regulation (the “EUFLR” or “the Regulation”) was published in the EU’s Official Journal on December 12, 2024.[1] Under the new Regulation, products that have been created through the use of forced labor will no longer be allowed to be introduced into the EU market or permitted to be exported from it.[2] Although the EUFLR will not come into effect until December 2027, businesses are wise to begin taking steps to ensure that they are compliant well before that time.[3] The Regulation introduces substantial new compliance obligations on all businesses operating in the EU market (or exporting from it), which may require a significant effort from companies that are affected to ensure conformity.

In this post, we offer an overview of the relevant compliance obligations that businesses impacted by the EUFLR need to be aware of. This includes, but is not limited to, implied due diligence obligations that may not be readily apparent and that many companies may not have encountered before.

Who does the EUFLR apply to?

Navigating the Latest Developments in Anti-corruption and White-Collar Crime in France

By Marion Seranne and Saeid Abedi on October 2, 2025 Posted in Anti-corruption, Compliance Program, Corporate compliance, Corporate Finance/M&A, Corruption, Courts, EU, France, General, Government Investigation, Industry Investigations, UK Bribery Act, United Kingdom

While the EU still lacks a unified regulatory framework, France has positioned itself as a key actor in the fight against corruption. This is due in large part to the impending adoption of the proposed Directive on combating corruption^[1] of May 3, 2023, which (i) provides harmonized definition for some offences, including active[2] and passive[3] bribery; (ii) introduces new offences such as illicit enrichment;[4] and (iii) introduces penalties in the form of fines ranging from at least 3% to 5% of the total worldwide turnover, or at least €24 or €40 million.[5]

Over the last decade, France has transformed its approach to fighting corruption,^[6] shifting from a reactive stance to a comprehensive, prevention-oriented regime designed to embed anti-corruption compliance into the very fabric of corporate governance.

French focus: Two key authorities acting jointly in enforcing corruption

The Inspector General Podcast: From DOJ to NASA to USAID — Paul Martin on a Career in the Inspector General Community

By Clark Ervin on September 16, 2025 Posted in Anti-corruption, Compliance Program, Department of Justice, Government Investigation, Inspector General, United States, US Department of Justice

In the latest episode of The Inspector General podcast series, we hear from the former Inspector General of USAID and NASA (and former Deputy Inspector General of the Department of Justice), Paul Martin, as he:

Reflects on what he’s achieved and learned over the course of his distinguished decades-long career in the Inspector General community
Explains why every American should know and care about the work Inspectors General do to make our government more effective, efficient and economical

Listen in here.

We hope you will continue to join us for this engaging series.

EU ESG – Managing ESG Compliance While CSRD and CS3D Are Under Review

By Marion Seranne, Thomas Delille and Charles Monnot on September 2, 2025 Posted in Compliance Program, Corporate compliance, EU, France, Germany, Italy

Launched in 2019, the EU Green Deal sets out a “plan to transform Europe’s economy, energy, transport, and industries for a more sustainable future”[1] by steering companies toward sustainability-oriented business models and achieving climate neutrality by 2050. As the flagship initiative of Ursula von der Leyen’s first Commission mandate, the EU Green Deal originally prioritized ambitious climate, environmental and social objectives. However, developments in early 2025 indicate a significant strategic shift within the EU, prioritizing competitiveness through its new “Competitiveness Compass” and reducing emphasis on the initial green agenda.

This shift is reflected in efforts to simplify regulatory requirements associated with the Green Deal, aiming to reduce compliance burdens on businesses, including two umbrella regulations:

UK Failure To Prevent Fraud Offence: Countdown to The 1st of September 2025 – Is Your Organisation Ready?

By Hannah Laming and Grace King on August 28, 2025 Posted in Anti-corruption, Compliance Program, Corporate compliance, Corruption, Courts, Fraud, Government Investigation, Serious Fraud Office (SFO), United Kingdom

Ahead of the new Failure To Prevent Fraud Offence[1] (“FTPFO”) coming into force on Monday 1 September 2025, the Serious Fraud Office (“SFO”) and the Crown Prosecution Service (“CPS”) have updated their Joint Prosecution Corporate Guidance (“Joint Guidance”). The Joint Guidance serves as a timely reminder to organisations that their grace period to implement, review, and improve their fraud prevention frameworks is coming to an end.

Following the Joint Guidance, the announcements from the prosecution authorities[2]suggest they are taking Failure to Prevent Fraud (“FTPF”) enforcement very seriously. Nick Ephgrave, the Director of the SFO, has stated that “now is the time to take action. Corporations must get their house in order or be ready to face investigation.”

Reflecting a similar urgency, Hannah von Dadelszen, Chief Crown Prosecutor at the CPS explained:

U.S. Sanctions Review: A Recap of OFAC’s 2025 Enforcement Actions and a Look Ahead

By Adam Hensel-Briscoe, Adam Klauder and Mary Maloney on July 7, 2025 Posted in Corporate compliance, Economic sanctions, General, Government Investigation, OFAC, Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation, Sanctions, Sanctions, United States, US Treasury

The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) has issued four enforcement actions during the first half of this year, two in January under former President Biden and two in June under President Trump. These actions, described below, underscore the ongoing relevance of sanctions compliance programs in the Trump era.

2025 Enforcement Actions

January 16, 2025: OFAC entered into a $1,076,923 settlement with the Florida-based real estate company, Family International Realty LLC (“Family International” or “the Company”), and its natural U.S. person owner (“the Owner”) for apparent violations of OFAC’s Ukraine-/Russia-related sanctions. The Company was alleged to have willfully evaded OFAC’s Ukraine-/Russia-related sanctions by transferring ownership of three luxury condominiums owned by two sanctioned Russian oligarchs to their non-sanctioned family members and their corresponding shell companies. During the investigation, OFAC uncovered telephone communications between the Owner and the sanctioned individuals demonstrating the Owner’s knowledge of the oligarchs’ sanctioned status. The Owner is also alleged to have coordinated with a law firm to facilitate the transfer of ownership. As a result, OFAC determined that the Company’s conduct was egregious and not voluntarily self-disclosed. OFAC’s corresponding Enforcement Release underscores that gatekeepers – including investors, attorneys, and other service providers – may be used to conceal or further sanctions evasion. Entities should conduct gatekeeper-related due diligence to ensure that their actions comply with sanctions regulations.

The Inspector General Podcast: A Conversation with Former Department of Defense Inspector General Robert Storch

By Clark Ervin on June 4, 2025 Posted in Compliance Program, Department of Justice, Government Investigation, Inspector General, United States, US Department of Justice

In this episode of The Inspector General podcast series, former Department of Defense Inspector General Robert Storch joins me to discuss:

His long and distinguished career in the Inspector General community
What Inspectors General do and why it is important
His thoughts about how Inspectors General can be further empowered to root out waste, fraud, abuse and mismanagement in the programs and operations of our government

Listen in here.

We hope you will continue to join us for this engaging series.

A Gap in the Market for Corruption Enforcement

By Hannah Laming and Molly McKenna on May 30, 2025 Posted in Commercial Bribery, Compliance Program, Corporate compliance, Corruption, EU, France, Germany, UK Bribery Act, United Kingdom, United States

This article will examine the evolving attitudes of the United Kingdom (“UK”), European Union (“EU”) and United States (“US”) toward corruption enforcement and will assess whether the UK and EU will be able to plug the potential enforcement gap created by President Trump’s recent Executive Order.

The United States

On February 10, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order titled, ‘Pausing Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Enforcement to Further American Economic and National Security’ (the “EO”). As discussed in our previous article, this directs the US Department of Justice (“DOJ”) to pause enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”) for 180 days, while the Attorney General reviews the guidelines and policies governing FCPA investigations and enforcement actions.

The EO does not remove all bribery and corruption risks because, among other things and notwithstanding the temporary pause, it does not apply to civil actions brought by the US Securities and Exchange Commission, it does not repeal the FCPA, and the FCPA’s statute of limitations remains five years, which could run longer that the current enforcement pause. However, the EO, in addition to numerous other Executive Orders (which can be found here), highlights a shift in enforcement priorities under the Trump administration, the full effects of which are yet to be seen.

Supply Chain Transparency: Updates on UK and EU Provisions on Forced Labour and Modern Slavery

By Hannah Laming, Francesco Liberatore and Francesca Puttock on May 28, 2025 Posted in Compliance Program, Corporate compliance, EU, United Kingdom

Forced labour and modern slavery have been the subject of renewed focus across the UK and EU in recent months. Below we touch upon key issues relating to the UK Home Office’s update to its statutory guidance on the Modern Slavery Act; the EU ban on products made with forced labour due to come into force in 2027; and the conclusion of the Italian Competition Authority’s recent investigation into fashion brands for misstatements about forced labour.

Update to the UK Home Office’s Statutory Guidance on Supply Chain Transparency

In the UK, companies are subject to the reporting obligations set out in section 54 of the Modern Slavery Act 2015 (the MSA). The largest commercial organisations (those with a turnover of £36 million or more) must produce and publish an annual modern slavery and human trafficking statement (MSS). These statements should set out the steps taken in the last financial year by an organisation to ensure that slavery and human trafficking are not taking place in its business or supply chain.

In the 10 years since the MSA received Royal Assent, the world’s concept of supply chain transparency reporting has been transformed, leading to criticism that the UK’s reporting regime had not kept pace. In particular, there had been poor monitoring and enforcement of compliance with these requirements, resulting in inconsistency in the quality and effectiveness of such statements. In response to recommendations made by the House of Lords Select Committee on Modern Slavery in October 2024, the UK government published new guidance “Transparency in supply chains: a practical guide” (Guidance) at the end of March 2025. The Guidance offers practical advice to businesses and sets higher expectations on organisations for the contents of their MSS.