Skip to Content


A company listed on a United States exchange may also have overseas operations. Such companies are subject to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (“FCPA”), which prohibits them from making, offering, or promising illicit payments to foreign officials to influence their official acts or decisions. Examples of such violations include funneling money to a foreign government or a representative of a foreign government in exchange for assistance developing a project in that country, acquiring a lucrative contract, settling legal disputes, or influencing the outcome of regulatory matters.

A violation of the FCPA may give rise to securities law claims. For example, consider a pharmaceutical company that obtains approval of its drug by bribing a foreign country’s health authority. If the company’s stock price declines when the truth is revealed and the drug’s continued approval is called into question, then the concealment of the illegal bribery might be considered “misleading,” which allows investors to seek a recovery from the company for their injury. Further, violations of the FCPA may subject the company to civil penalty, criminal action, injunctions, or disgorgement of profits. These too might damage the company’s stock price when the market learns of them, and investors may seek recovery of these additional losses.

However, foreign FCPA frauds are often difficult to prove given that they commonly involve foreign laws, foreign regulatory bodies, and foreign financial statements. Experienced securities class action lawyers are key to the successful prosecution of such cases.

If you believe that a company has engaged in bribery, please contact class action attorneys at Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP.

Court Recognition

“And without question, the Court is of the opinion that the value of benefit that’s been conferred to the class is extremely sizable and that this Court is certainly aware that the skill and efficiency of plaintiff’s counsel is what attributed to this settlement, and they are learned securities counsel. The Court is mindful of that, and as a result they were able to sort of weed their way through the complex issues in this case, and also to bring this about — bring about a settlement rather in short order as these matters go. So the Court certainly attributes that to counsel’s skill and efficiency, as well as the ability to work with the adversaries in this matter.”

–Hon. Susan D. Wigention, U.S. District Judge, District of New Jersey

“Class Counsel has conducted the litigation and achieved the Settlement in good faith and with skill, perseverance and diligent advocacy”

— Hon. Donovan W. Frank, U.S. District Judge, District of Minnesota

“The court finds that the Settlement Fund… created by Class Counsel is an exceptional result… The settlement is significantly above the average securities class action settlement when measured as a percentage of losses recovered… The court finds that Class Counsel, particularly Co-Lead Counsel, exerted tremendous effort on behalf of the class in the prosecution of this action… The Court finds that Class Counsel skillfully prosecuted this action, particularly given that this case was unusually complex relative to most securities fraud class actions. ”

–Hon. Dickran M. Tevrizian (Ret.), U.S. District Court Judge, Central District of California

More Testimonials