
Publication
The European Commission’s Net-Zero Industry Act and European Hydrogen Bank explained
The European Commission published proposals for its Net-Zero Industry Act (NZIA) on 16th March 2023.
We use cookies and other similar technology to collect data about you to allow us to deliver our online services, measure our website audience and improve your browsing experience. Full details on the cookies we use are set out in our Cookies policy. Please click OK to signify your consent to our use of cookies.
You can withdraw your consent by clicking “manage cookies” and following the instructions shown.
United States | Publication | December 14, 2020
Given the increased use of subpoenas to elicit information from non-party entities, in-house counsel will be interested to learn of the recent updates to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6) mandating serving counsel to timely confer in good faith with the served party. Rule 30(b)(6) allows a party to depose a public or private entity by service of a notice or subpoena that “describe[s] with reasonable particularity the matters for examination.” Reasonable particularity means that the served entity can identify from the notice or subpoena the outer boundaries of the matters to be investigated.
Traditionally, the burden then fell on the served organization to identify an individual or individuals with the requisite knowledge or educate a representative to testify about information known or reasonably available to the organization relating to the listed matters. The old rule was: (1) burdensome for the served entity, which often had no prior knowledge of the litigation; (2) risky, due to the binding nature of these depositions; and (3) potentially inefficient, because the topics were often overly broad to ensure coverage of all desired information.
The recent amendment may offer some protection from these burdens. Effective December 1, 2020, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6) provides:
Before or promptly after the notice or subpoena is served, the serving party and the organization must confer in good faith about the matters for examination. A subpoena must advise a non-party organization of its duty to confer with the serving party and to designate each person who will testify.
The impact of this amendment will depend on the willingness of counsel to engage in meaningful discussions and courts’ desire to assertively enforce the meet and confer requirement. At a minimum, entities receiving a subpoena may want to consider the following when responding to forthcoming notices or subpoenas:
As entities continue to face a growing number of non-party subpoenas, entities will want to keep these changes to the Rule 30(b)(6) in mind as well as the ways these changes impact their response strategy.
We are grateful to the assistance of Laura Hunt, who is admitted to practice only in Maryland. Her practice is supervised by principals of the firm admitted in the District of Columbia.
Publication
The European Commission published proposals for its Net-Zero Industry Act (NZIA) on 16th March 2023.
Publication
In this edition of Regulation Around the World we review the position regarding beneficial ownership registers which has come into the spotlight following work by the Financial Action Task Force and the introduction of reforms in a number of jurisdictions.
Publication
The Financial Services and Markets Bill (FSM Bill), which was laid in front of Parliament in July 2022 and is expected to be finalised in the coming months, includes the introduction of a new designated activities regime (DAR).
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events...
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2023