Innospec is facing a US$42m claim in the English High Court from a Jordanian firm that alleges that Innospec's US6.3m bribes prevented the firm from winning certain fuel additive contracts with the Iraqi Ministry of Oil between 2003 and 2010.
Jalal Bezee Mejel Algaood & Partners (JBMA), a producer of a rival fuel additive, is claiming for damages for conspiracy to cause injury by unlawful means (i.e. contravention of UK and US anti-bribery legislation) by using an agent to bribe officials at the Iraqi Ministry of Oil to ensure the continued purchase of Innospec's product at the expense of JBMA's.
The claim relies primarily on judgments and documents arising out of criminal and civil actions brought by US and UK prosecutors, which were settled for around US$40m. It follows a similar claim against Innospec in the US by its former competitors NewMarket Corp, which was settled in late 2011.
If successful, this case could pave the way in the UK for claims to be made against companies found to have bribed by their competitors – although there are likely to be jurisdiction, causation and evidential issues in many cases (especially where prosecutions have been settled with no admission of guilty).
Given the general global trend towards increased enforcement of anticorruption legislation, such litigation presents another fundamental business risk for companies engaged in bribery.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
