In Camera vs. Boston Scientific Corp., Ruben Carnero, hired by Delaware manufacturer of medical equipment Boston Scientific Corp. of Natick, Massachusetts, filed a civil suit against his former company in a bid to recover statutory termination pay. Carnero had been hired to work in Boston Scientific's Argentina subsidiary and was then moved to its Brazilian office. He was fired in April 2003 after reporting that both subsidiaries were inflating sales figures improperly.

A district court ruled that nothing in Sarbanes-Oxley's wording suggests the extension of whistleblower protections afforded to U.S. workers to non-U.S. employees working overseas. The court partly based its decision on the generally held presumption that without clear congressional assent, extraterritorial applications of U.S. laws are not applied so as not to conflict with the laws of other countries.

Sarbanes-Oxley specifically contained Congressional language that required foreign accounting firms to register with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board and extraterritorial jurisdiction for criminal offenses, acknowledging that Congress was aware of the need for extraterritorial extension at times. Because the extension was not specifically mentioned for civil whistleblower cases, however, it meant that Congress did not wish it to be so.

Source: Wisconsin Law Journal