Posts under ‘Sir Mark Moody-Stuart’

 Sir Mark Moody-Stuart, former chair of Shell. Photograph: Frank Baron for the Guardian

EXTRACT FROM A WITNESS STATEMENT BY MIKE MCMAHON:

Mr Donovan has brought to my attention Shell’s Statement of General Business Principles and a speech by Shell Chairman Mr Mark Moody-Stuart delivered on 8th October 1997. The following are extracts from the relevant speech:

“Commercial activity not only can be, but should be, undertaken with positive underlying values – ethical and moral. The Statement of General Business Principles constitutes a set of basic core values – honesty, integrity and respect for people … We do not bend these Principles. They are non-contestable and non-negotiable. If an employee fails to uphold these values he or she no longer belongs with us”.

Despite this statement Shell has not sacked Mr AJL or his accomplices. I assume that like my company, the other companies involved in the long drawn out tender process abided strictly by the normal  ethical rules. Mr AJL, with the support of tis colleagues, Mr Hannagan and Mr Watson, self evidently did not do so. I suffered significant losses as a consequence of being deceived by Mr AJL to participate in a tender process that was corrupted by his indefensible conduct. 

(The initials AJL have been substituted for the name of the relevant former Shell executive. Despite his inspiring comments above, Moody-Stuart supported the throughly dishonest conduct of AJL)

Extracts from the ebook “John Donovan, Shell’s Nightmare” (now available on Amazon websites globally)

Extracted from pages 145 and 146

The Shell executive to whom we disclosed our promotional concepts in strictest confidence did not just poach ideas from us. We were not alone. We found out from discovery documents that other parties complained of the same problem involving the same unethical Shell executive. He was nonetheless able to genuinely claim the support of senior Shell executives for his reprehensible activities that were totally at odds with Shell’s claimed Business Principles. Honesty, integrity, etc. read more

Extracts from the ebook “John Donovan, Shell’s Nightmare” (now available on Amazon websites globally)

Extracted from pages 118 & 119.

The Smart trial commenced on 15th June 1999 in Court 58 on the 7th Floor of the modern air-conditioned Thomas More Building at the Royal Courts of Justice in London.

At the start of the trial the Judge, Mr. Justice Laddie QC, commented that it was one of the most unpleasant cases that had ever come before him, with both sides making extremely serious allegations against each other.

Personal Intervention of Judy Moody-Stuart

Days before the Smart trial commenced, a magazine published an article containing a reference to an extraordinary personal intervention by Judy Moody-Stuart, the Quaker wife of the Shell Chairman, Mark Moody-Stuart. (Now Sir Mark & Lady Judy Moody-Stuart). read more

The promotion that was the subject of our 2nd High Court Action against Shell

Extracts from the ebook “John Donovan, Shell’s Nightmare” (now available on Amazon websites globally)

Shell kept silent about Hakluyt, even during a meeting with Mr. Rines on 10 September 1998 at Shell-Mex House attended by Mr. Wiseman, Mr. Joseph of DJ Freeman and a representative from Shell’s media department. Some judgment can be made on how sensitive the subject was by the fact that both sides tape-recorded the entire interview.

Extracted from pages 110 to 117 inclusive.

AN INVESTIGATION IN 1997 BY SIMON RINES FOR THE GUARDIAN NEWSPAPER

I am able to provide an overview from an independent journalist on how matters looked in April 1997. It is in the form of a 14-page draft Guardian/Observer Newspaper article authored by Simon Rines, as faxed to John Donovan on 11 April 1997. Mr. Rines wrote for many marketing magazines as well as for The Telegraph, The Observer, and The Sunday Business.

No article was published at the time. Simon Rines was however the joint author with Sylvia Pfeifer of an article published by The Sunday Business newspaper on 6 June 1999: “Donovan takes Smart case against Shell to court.” That article can be seen on the last page of this chapter. read more

By Steven Mufson and Chris Mooney April 5 at 4:28 PM

A Dutch journalist has uncovered Royal Dutch Shell documents as old as 1988 that showed the oil company understood the gravity of climate change, the company’s large contribution to it and how hard it would be to stop it. The 1988 report titled “The Greenhouse Effect” calculated that the Shell group alone was contributing 4 percent of global carbon-dioxide emissions through its oil, natural gas and coal products. “By the time global warming becomes detectable it could be too late to take effective countermeasures to reduce the effects or even to stabilize the situation,” the report warned. FULL ARTICLE read more

Now we have the latest bombshell – the burglaries carried out against people associated with our SMART claim, including key witnesses. Brief cases have been forced open, papers examined, including privileged documents between DM and its lawyers. The latter included a brief issued to Dr Mary Vitoria QC – a document Shell’s lawyers recently failed to obtain after making an application to the Courts (which was dismissed with costs).

Extract from the ebook “John Donovan, Shell’s Nightmare” (now available on Amazon websites globally)

(BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT SHELL’S EPIC 25 YEAR FEUD WITH JOHN DONOVAN – which puts the extracts below in overall context.)

The extract below should be read in the context of the fact that we were besieged by undercover activity during the run-up to the SMART High Court Trial – the climax of our litigation alleging that Shell had stolen Intellectual Property from our company Don Marketing. Shell brought a Counterclaim amid a barrage of aggressive threats and sinister activity directed against us. Shell did not disclose its close connection with a private spy firm Hakluyt & Company.

Extracts below from pages 102, 103 & 104

Begins

SINISTER BURGLARIES

The initial underhand activity soon turned into something even more sinister. read more

The revelation that Phillips was apparently just one of an undisclosed number of agents making enquiries was intimidating and no doubt meant to be so. Shell lawyers were unwilling to disclose how many agents were involved, or what they were doing on Shell’s behalf. The excuse given of making “routine credit enquiries” did not stand up. Routine credit enquiries can be made instantaneously using modern technology. The questions Phillips asked staff about us had nothing to do with credit enquiries. Their agent was clearly engaged in gathering information…

Extract from the ebook “John Donovan, Shell’s Nightmare” (now available on Amazon websites globally)

(BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT SHELL’S EPIC 25 YEAR FEUD WITH JOHN DONOVAN – which puts the extracts below in overall context.)

The extract below should be read in the context of the fact that we were besieged by undercover activity during the run-up to the SMART High Court Trial – the climax of our litigation alleging that Shell had stolen Intellectual Property from our company Don Marketing. Shell brought a Counterclaim amid a barrage of aggressive threats and sinister activity directed against us. Shell did not disclose its close connection with a private spy firm Hakluyt & Company.

Extracts below from pages 100 & 101

Begins

I confronted Shell about the sinister activity. read more

Royal Dutch Shell Group Chairman Mark Moody-Stuart

Shell Group Chairman Sir Mark Moody-Stuart and his family became personally involved in the Donovan litigation and associated events.

Extract from the ebook “John Donovan, Shell’s Nightmare” (now available on Amazon websites globally)

(BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT SHELL’S EPIC 25 YEAR FEUD WITH JOHN DONOVAN – which puts the extracts below in overall context.)

The extract below should be read in the context of the fact that we were besieged by undercover activity during the run-up to the SMART High Court Trial – the climax of our litigation alleging that Shell had stolen the SMART multi-partner loyalty card concept from our company Don Marketing. Shell brought a Counterclaim amid a barrage of aggressive threats and sinister activity against us.

Extract below from page 99

Anonymous Call received 14 June 1998

I received a telephone call from a different gentleman who refused to disclose his name. When I stated that I was not prepared to hold a conversation on that basis, he indicated that if I gave him a few minutes, it would become obvious that he had an intimate knowledge of the litigation and associated events. I would learn something to my advantage. Intrigued by his introduction, I listened to what he had to say. read more

Extract from the ebook “John Donovan, Shell’s Nightmare” (now available on Amazon websites globally)

(BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT SHELL’S EPIC 25 YEAR FEUD WITH JOHN DONOVAN – which puts the extracts below in overall context.)

Extract below from pages 55, 56, 57 & 58 consisting of an informed damning judgement (in June 2004) on Shell management by Dr. John Huong a Shell Production Geologist. He blew the whistle internally on the reserves fraud that resulted in the forced merger of Shell Transport and Trading and Royal Dutch Petroleum, into Royal Dutch Shell Plc in 2005. He was fired for being a person man of high integrity. Eight companies in the Shell group jointly sued him for defamation, but eventually, six years later, settled that action along with his claim against Shell for wrongful dismissal.

Extract Begins

CONTENT OF A LEAFLET PUBLISHED ON OUR WEBSITE AND CIRCULATED IN JUNE 2004 AT THE SHELL CENTRE, LONDON. ALL EXTRACTS FROM COMMENTS MADE BY DR. JOHN HUONG

“I will supply for publication further informed comment and revelations in the run up to Shell’s AGM on 28 June. It will include examples of the toxic combination of arrogance, greed, dishonesty, and blatant disregard for all ethical norms by Shell Management, that has culminated in the current shame heaped upon the once proud Shell name.” read more

Definition of feud – a prolonged and bitter quarrel or dispute.

By John Donovan

My families relationship with Shell has been described in the Times Newspaper as a war and a public feud.

Prior to the outbreak of hostilities, we actually got on very well with Shell.

A sales promotion company my late father and I co-founded in 1979 (Don Marketing) was responsible for many spectacular Shell promotions in the UK and around the world.

Our award winning “Make Money” game in the 1980’s caught the public imagination and pushed up Shell’s petrol sales by 30%. It is recognised by industry experts as being the most successful promotion in the history of sales promotion. We also ran it for Shell in overseas markets. read more

By John Donovan

Published below are the final pages – 113 to 138 – inclusive, from the Writ served on multiple companies within the Royal Dutch Shell Group on 28 June 2017 on behalf of Esther Kiobel. These pages provide supporting information about the claim, including a List of Exhibits. The formatting is not 100% accurate, but the content is correct.

Extract begins

CLAIM

The claimants request the court to enter judgement, provisionally enforceable as far as possible:

1. to rule that the defendants acted unlawfully towards the claimants and are jointly and severally liable to them for the damage that they have suffered and will suffer in the future as a result of the defendants’ unlawful actions, which damage is to be assessed during separate follow-up proceedings and settled according to the law, all this plus the statutory interest up to the date of settlement in full;
2. to order the defendants within 21 days of the judgment to compel the CEO of Royal Dutch Shell, in any case the CEO of SPDC, to make a public apology for the role that Shell played in the events leading to the death of the claimants’ spouses and to publish the text of this statement clearly visible on its website, subject to a penalty of €20,000 per day (or a sum to be determined by the court in accordance with the proper administration of justice) that they fail to comply with this order;
3. to order the defendants jointly and severally to pay the extrajudicial costs;
4. to order the defendants, jointly and severally, to pay the costs of these proceedings, including the subsequent costs.

The cost of this: €80.42 read more

For years, Shell encouraged the Nigerian regime to take (more) effective measures designed to ensure Shell’s return to Ogoniland. Shell did this despite the fact that it had meanwhile learned from experience that in its actions, the regime frequently violated human rights and many people were killed.

By John Donovan

Earlier today we published an article about the latest legal moves on behalf on Esther Kiobel in the US courts against a Shell law firm. We now return to the publication of information about her legal action against Shell in the Netherlands. The numbered paragraphs below are extracted from the 138 page Writ served on multiple Royal Dutch Shell companies on 28 June 2017. As can be seen in the footnotes, the allegations are supported by voluminous evidence.

Extracts begin

8.8 Shell Nigeria Shell operated as a single entity

8.8.1 Introduction read more

By John Donovan

In the last 24 hours, Royal Dutch Shell companies in The Netherlands, the UK and Nigeria have all been served legal proceedings by a human rights law firm, Prakken d’Oliveira.

An extract from an English version of the Writ of Summons is provided below. The content is a further hammer blow to Shell’s already shattered reputation arising from its past activities in Nigeria e.g. OPL 245.  Basically the “judicial murder” of the “Ogoni 9” has come back to haunt Shell again. read more

“Shell is very different from Enron. We were criticized for that some time ago and I’’m glad we have a absolutely rock-solid way we do business. It’s all completely transparent, as far as Shell is concerned.”

By John Donovan

Following publication of my article Shell false pledges of transparency and openness contributors to this website have been accused of hating Shell. That is not the case.

Many of us do, however, take great exception to the hypocritical claims made by successive RDS Chairman and CEO’s over many years that Shell operates within an ethical code – the General Business Principles – which includes a pledge of transparency.

Shell Group Chairman Sir Mark Moody-Stuart preached transparency while conspiring with senior colleagues to hide information from Shell shareholders. read more

By John Donovan

Interesting to read that seven years after the departure of Sir Mark Moody-Stuart (right) as chairman of the mining giant Anglo American, the company is in difficulties.

See Dow Jones news article: Anglo American to Downsize Further After Steep Loss.

Apparently the troubled company is in the throes of “an aggressive restructuring.”

Reminiscent in some respects of the state of affairs at Shell during and after the tenure of Sir Mark as Group Chairman.

The Wall Street Journal reported in November 2004 “How Shell’s Move To Revamp Culture Ended in Scandal.“ read more

By John Donovan

Interesting to read the news today that the repressive and barbaric Saudi regime is considering publicly listing the state-owned oil company Saudi Aramco. 

The headline on one such article is: “Saudi Arabia’s Giant & Secretive Oil Company May Go For IPO“

It is ironical under the circumstances that retired Royal Dutch Shell Chairman Sir Mark Moody-Stuart, the long-time claimed champion of transparency and ethics, is a member of the Saudi Aramco board. 

His late brother George Moody-Stuart was the highly respected Chairman of Transparency International.  read more