LONDON, March 4 (Reuters) - British American Tobacco is facing a London lawsuit from shareholders over allegations the cigarette maker failed to properly tell markets about breaches of U.S. sanctions
British American Tobacco faces UK shareholders' lawsuit over North Korea sanctions breaches
Overview of the Lawsuit and Sanctions Breaches
Allegations Against British American Tobacco
LONDON, March 5 (Reuters) - British American Tobacco is facing a London lawsuit from shareholders over allegations the cigarette maker failed to properly tell markets about breaches of U.S. sanctions in relation to its business in North Korea.
Settlement with U.S. Authorities
BAT in 2023 agreed to pay more than $635 million to U.S. authorities after a subsidiary admitted conspiring to violate U.S. sanctions by selling tobacco products to North Korea and commit bank fraud from 2007 to 2017.
Details of the Shareholder Lawsuit
More than 100 current and former BAT shareholders filed a lawsuit against the company at London's High Court on February 27, the claimants' lawyers said in a statement.
Claimants' Allegations
"The claim alleges that BAT failed to properly publish information to the stock market about its business operations in North Korea since 2007 to 2023," law firm Fox Williams said.
BAT's Response to the Lawsuit
BAT, which sells cigarettes, tobacco and other nicotine products, said in a statement that it was aware of the lawsuit which "relates to BAT's historical business activities in relation to North Korea".
Restrictions on BAT's Comments
The statement added that, under its 2023 agreement with the U.S. authorities, "BAT cannot make any comment on the documentation published by the investigating authorities, the contents therein, or on related factual matters".
Additional Legal Actions and Context
Unknown Value and Further Details
The value of the lawsuit is not known and no further details were immediately available.
Separate Lawsuit Filed
A separate lawsuit was filed against the company at the High Court on the same day, according to court records. Stewarts, the law firm representing that group of claimants, declined to comment.
Reporting Credits
(Reporting by Sam Tobin. Additional reporting by Emma Rumney. Editing by Mark Potter)
