Dear Micro$oft, The Talk is On and Heads Will Fall

One judge Francis told Microsoft on the 25th April 2014 to get its Global Criminal Compliance Team together and obey a warrant issued for its American headquarters. That district court judge could not care less if the data the warrant demanded was not physically stored within the jurisdiction of the Court. He did not even consider the Hague convention or the fact that the data is stored in the equipment of another company, a subsidiary, based within the EU. He did not even give EU legislation, or the Safe Harbor principles, a glimpse. He cited US law and bluntly told the corporation that if its US headquarters do not impose it on its limbs overseas, it shall be penalised.

That is one cheeky judge – question is, will Microsoft call his bluff? More importantly, what are the implications for the country where the data is physically stored, namely Ireland?

Constructive Notice: Where to point the finger?

Our entire national Economy collapsed and we still don’t get it; banks are at the heart of our wealth. Mere punitive legislation, mergers and recapitalisation will do nothing for our patient; we are applying a plaster on an infected wound.

In Ireland we make law two ways: either judicially or through the Oireachtas (although many, in an attempted support of the express provision of our Constitution in Article 15, namely that only the Oireachtas has the power to legislate, will disagree – therefore I would have to quote God McCarthy in Rooney v Connolly (1987), law made by judges can only be undone by judges). The Oireachtas has failed in healing the wound and, apparently, so has our judiciary. The question to be asked is, where did we go wrong?

In the madness of Company or in the Company of madness?

Edit: Find additional observations to the original article below – Updated 30/12/2012

Yesterday, just when I got the chance to make a joke as to whether we should consult the stars about any real change in Company law, Pillar B of the Companies Bill 2012 was released, along with an amended Pillar A and an explanatory memorandum. It was unsurprising, as the people involved in this project are known for their punctuality and I was admittedly beginning to feel a bit anxious.

When the soft copy was published last year everybody was very pleased with the new type of company that was made the epicentre, ie the Private Company Limited by Shares (CLS), which is an improved version of the current equivalent. Now that the remaining Parts are out, I am not sure everyone is still feeling the same way. We were promised a simplification, albeit a consolidation, of the law revolving around companies. After giving the Bill a first read – it is more or less 1,500 pages, including the memorandum- this is the picture shaped in my mind: