- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Infosys Says That It Is Not Aware Of Any Fresh Lawsuit Filed In The United States Except For The One Filed In October ’19
By Bobby Anthony A day after a US-based law firm announced filing of a class action lawsuit against Infosys, the info-tech services major has stated that it is not aware of any additional complaints, except for the one filed in October 2019.“The company is aware of several media stories referencing an additional securities class action lawsuit against Infosys. The company is not aware of any...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
A day after a US-based law firm announced filing of a class action lawsuit against Infosys, the info-tech services major has stated that it is not aware of any additional complaints, except for the one filed in October 2019.
“The company is aware of several media stories referencing an additional securities class action lawsuit against Infosys. The company is not aware of any additional complaints, other than the initial complaint, which was disclosed on October 24, 2019," Infosys stated in a regulatory filing to the stock exchanges.
Regarding the United States-based Schall Law Firm asking investors with losses in excess of USD 100,000 to contact the firm, Infosys said that it is “not uncommon” for plaintiff's lawyers asking potential plaintiffs to contact them, for applying lead plaintiff status.
“It appears that the press communications by the Schall Law Firm is soliciting potential lead plaintiff applicants,” according to the Infosys statement.
According to the Los Angeles-based Schall Law Firm, Infosys made false and misleading statements to the market and used improper recognition of revenue to boost short-term profits.
This came months after an anonymous whistleblower complained against Infosys and its CEO Salil Parekh on similar lines. The company, however, after an internal investigation stated that it could not find any evidence.
Earlier, a statement by Schall Law Firm had stated, “Based on these facts, the company's public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Infosys, investors suffered damages”.