header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
13 October 2023 / Paul Schwartfeger
Issue: 8044 / Categories: Features , Technology
printer mail-detail

What’s up with WhatsApp?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
142549
The Morgan Stanley fine shows why good tech lawyers take a broad approach, explains Paul Schwartfeger
  • Too much tech specialism, particularly at an early stage, can be counter-productive to resolving the client’s issue.
  • Shows the complex range of issues tech lawyers might navigate when advising clients on compliance.
  • Illustrates why a broad approach works best.

Morgan Stanley’s fine for failing to record energy traders’ messages not only shows how Ofgem’s reach extends beyond energy companies, but also serves as a useful frame for thinking about the risks of ‘tech blinkers’ when it comes to matters of tech law.

Ofgem, the energy regulator for Great Britain, fined investment bank Morgan Stanley & Co International plc £5.4m last month for breaching regulations aimed at preventing insider dealing and market abuse in wholesale energy markets. The regulator found the bank breached reg 8 of the Electricity and Gas (Market Integrity and Transparency) (Enforcement etc) Regulations 2013 (2013/1389) after it failed to record messages linked to energy market transactions sent by traders via WhatsApp

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll