Oil prices poised to tumble
Extracts from an article by ByAndrew Critchlow, Business News Editor of The Telegraph, published 12 May 2014 under the newspaper headline: “Oil prices poised to tumble as US toys with opening reserve stocks”
Oil prices are on the brink of possibly their biggest correction since the global financial crisis after Vladimir Putin’s gamble to use Russia’s crude as a political weapon backfired spectacularly on the Kremlin. A potent energy superpower, Russia had thought that it could use its status as the world’s largest oil producer and biggest exporter of natural gas through cross-border pipelines to intimidate and quite literally bully Western powers into submission over Ukraine. Regardless of the fracking revolution in the US, the world appears to be flooded with crude. Putin appears to have forgotten the lesson of his fallen Soviet comrades of the old communist order, and in meddling with world oil markets, he may have laid the foundations for his own economic demise.
WEB PUBLISHED ARTICLE UNDER THE HEADLINE: Obama aims oil weapon at Putin but will he pull the trigger?
Oil prices are on the brink of possibly their biggest correction since the global financial crisis after Vladimir Putin’s gamble to use Russia’s crude as a political weapon backfired spectacularly on the Kremlin. A potent energy superpower, Russia had thought that it could use its status as the world’s largest oil producer and biggest exporter of natural gas through cross-border pipelines to intimidate and quite literally bully Western powers into submission over Ukraine. Regardless of the fracking revolution in the US, the world appears to be flooded with crude. Putin appears to have forgotten the lesson of his fallen Soviet comrades of the old communist order, and in meddling with world oil markets, he may have laid the foundations for his own economic demise.
WEB PUBLISHED ARTICLE UNDER THE HEADLINE: Obama aims oil weapon at Putin but will he pull the trigger?
Share this:
Like this:
Investigators seek breakthrough a year after EU raided Big Oil
By Gaspard Sebag, Lananh Nguyen and Andy Hoffman: Bloomberg News 12 May 2014
Twelve months after raiding oil companies and Platts in a hunt for evidence of possible manipulation of price benchmarks, European Union officials are looking for a breakthrough. On May 14 last year, EU investigators had to leap into a taxi cab to Royal Dutch Shell Plc (RDSA)’s trading floor on the Strand in central London after arriving at the wrong destination — the company’s London head office on the opposite side of the River Thames – according to one person familiar with the antitrust raids on that day. Lawyers say such mishaps are common during so-called surprise inspections — especially where officials lack the guiding hand of an immunity applicant. “All Shell companies fully cooperated with the EU commission during the inspection at our offices and will continue to do so as the commission’s investigation proceeds,” Ross Whittam, a company spokesman said.
By Gaspard Sebag, Lananh Nguyen and Andy Hoffman: Bloomberg News 12 May 2014
Twelve months after raiding oil companies and Platts in a hunt for evidence of possible manipulation of price benchmarks, European Union officials are looking for a breakthrough. On May 14 last year, EU investigators had to leap into a taxi cab to Royal Dutch Shell Plc (RDSA)’s trading floor on the Strand in central London after arriving at the wrong destination — the company’s London head office on the opposite side of the River Thames – according to one person familiar with the antitrust raids on that day. Lawyers say such mishaps are common during so-called surprise inspections — especially where officials lack the guiding hand of an immunity applicant. “All Shell companies fully cooperated with the EU commission during the inspection at our offices and will continue to do so as the commission’s investigation proceeds,” Ross Whittam, a company spokesman said.
Share this:
Like this:
Will Russia Be Royal Dutch Shell’s Savior?
Shell’s Ben van Beurden bows to Putin on Good Friday, 18 April 2014
Shell’s Ben van Beurden bows to Putin on Good Friday, 18 April 2014
Extract from an article by
Russia’s acquisition of Crimea has Germany uneasy about its dependence on Russian natural gas. Now Royal Dutch Shell can pat itself on the back for deciding to acquire significantly more LNG liquefaction capacity than its big oil peers by 2017. Europe’s gas situation is very complicated, but Shell is shaping up to be a big beneficiary of the current German-Russian angst.
Share this:
Like this:
Royal Dutch Shell employees warned about giving perjured testimony
Shell staff were reminded recently of the obligation to be truthful if called upon to testify under oath. They were also reminded that even when testifying as a Shell employee on behalf of Shell, they were personally liable for the consequences of any untruths or misleading statements that they made.
DEFINITION OF PERJURY: The deliberate, willful giving of false, misleading, or incomplete testimony under oath.
From a Regular Contributor
I heard on the grapevine that Shell staff were reminded recently of the obligation to be truthful if called upon to testify under oath. They were also reminded that even when testifying as a Shell employee on behalf of Shell, they were personally liable for the consequences of any untruths or misleading statements that they made.
It may seem surprising to some people that senior Shell staff needed to be reminded of their legal obligation to be truthful when testifying. I also understand that some Shell employees were surprised to learn that they were personally liable for the consequences of any misleading statements they made when testifying on behalf of their employer.
I’m sure that there are still people within Shell naïve enough to believe that they can further their careers by providing misleading testimony on behalf of their employer, and assuming that their employer will be able to protect them from the consequences. International employees may also believe that they can provide testimony in a foreign jurisdiction without fear of being pursued in their home country.
Shell employees might therefore be interested in the information provided in this Wikipedia article defining the act of perjury and covering the potential penalties for perjury in a number of countries. It does not cover all issues, but provides an indication of the potential dire consequences of deliberately giving false testimony under oath.
Extracts
I heard on the grapevine that Shell staff were reminded recently of the obligation to be truthful if called upon to testify under oath. They were also reminded that even when testifying as a Shell employee on behalf of Shell, they were personally liable for the consequences of any untruths or misleading statements that they made.
It may seem surprising to some people that senior Shell staff needed to be reminded of their legal obligation to be truthful when testifying. I also understand that some Shell employees were surprised to learn that they were personally liable for the consequences of any misleading statements they made when testifying on behalf of their employer.
I’m sure that there are still people within Shell naïve enough to believe that they can further their careers by providing misleading testimony on behalf of their employer, and assuming that their employer will be able to protect them from the consequences. International employees may also believe that they can provide testimony in a foreign jurisdiction without fear of being pursued in their home country.
Shell employees might therefore be interested in the information provided in this Wikipedia article defining the act of perjury and covering the potential penalties for perjury in a number of countries. It does not cover all issues, but provides an indication of the potential dire consequences of deliberately giving false testimony under oath.
Extracts
England and Wales
Perjury is a statutory offence in England and Wales. It is created by section 1(1) of the Perjury Act 1911. Section 1 of that Act reads:
(1) If any person lawfully sworn as a witness or as an interpreter in a judicial proceeding wilfully makes a statement material in that proceeding, which he knows to be false or does not believe to be true, he shall be guilty of perjury, and shall, on conviction thereof on indictment, be liable to penal servitude for a term not exceeding seven years, or to imprisonment . . . for a term not exceeding two years, or to a fine or to both such penal servitude or imprisonment and fine.
Perjury is a statutory offence in England and Wales. It is created by section 1(1) of the Perjury Act 1911. Section 1 of that Act reads:
(1) If any person lawfully sworn as a witness or as an interpreter in a judicial proceeding wilfully makes a statement material in that proceeding, which he knows to be false or does not believe to be true, he shall be guilty of perjury, and shall, on conviction thereof on indictment, be liable to penal servitude for a term not exceeding seven years, or to imprisonment . . . for a term not exceeding two years, or to a fine or to both such penal servitude or imprisonment and fine.
United States
Perjury’s current position in America’s legal takes the form of state and federal statutes. Most notably, the United States Code prohibits perjury, which is defined in two senses for federal purposes as someone who:
(1) Having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true; or
(2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true[29]
The above statute provides for a fine and/or up to five years in prison as punishment.
See also: Making false statements
RELATED
Perjury’s current position in America’s legal takes the form of state and federal statutes. Most notably, the United States Code prohibits perjury, which is defined in two senses for federal purposes as someone who:
(1) Having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true; or
(2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true[29]
(1) Having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true; or
(2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true[29]
The above statute provides for a fine and/or up to five years in prison as punishment.
See also: Making false statements
RELATED
Question: What Is the Crime of Perjury?
Answer: In its most simple form, perjury is lying under oath. The crime of perjury is the willful swearing, either spoken or in writing, to tell the truth and then giving false information.Perjury can occur even if the person has not been sworn to tell the truth, such as in a courtroom. Merely signing a document under penalty of perjury that contains false statements can be a crime. Signing an income tax return that contains false information is an act of perjury, for example.In most jurisdictions, the false information has to be material to the issue or affect the outcome for perjury to be a chargeable crime. If the false statement directly affects the results of the case or causes a unjust decision to be made, the person can be charged with perjury.Because the crime of perjury can cause a miscarriage of justice to occur, it is considered a very serious crime. Under U.S. federal law, for example, perjury is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison.
PS. If anyone can help with perjury law for the Netherlands, please point me in the right direction.
Answer: In its most simple form, perjury is lying under oath. The crime of perjury is the willful swearing, either spoken or in writing, to tell the truth and then giving false information.Perjury can occur even if the person has not been sworn to tell the truth, such as in a courtroom. Merely signing a document under penalty of perjury that contains false statements can be a crime. Signing an income tax return that contains false information is an act of perjury, for example.In most jurisdictions, the false information has to be material to the issue or affect the outcome for perjury to be a chargeable crime. If the false statement directly affects the results of the case or causes a unjust decision to be made, the person can be charged with perjury.Because the crime of perjury can cause a miscarriage of justice to occur, it is considered a very serious crime. Under U.S. federal law, for example, perjury is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison.
PS. If anyone can help with perjury law for the Netherlands, please point me in the right direction.
Share this:
Like this:
Kuwait signs $12bn LNG supply deal with Shell
Extract from a Reuters article published Sunday 11 May 2014
KUWAIT May 11 (Reuters) – Kuwait’s state oil group said it signed a six-year liquefied natural gas (LNG) supply deal with Royal Dutch Shell on Sunday, worth an estimated $12 billion, as the major oil exporter seeks to meet energy demands for the hot summer months.
The TRUTH will set you FREE.
No comments:
Post a Comment