header-logo header-logo

Reckless bankers could go to jail

17 March 2016
Issue: 7691 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Lawyers question prospects of Crown discharging criminal burden of proof

Senior bankers could face seven years in prison or an unlimited fine in future if their reckless actions cause their institutions to fail.

As of 7 March, senior managers in UK banks, building societies or Prudential Regulation Authority-regulated investment firms will have committed a criminal offence if they agree to a decision that causes the institution to fail, knew it could cause the institution to fail, and their conduct fell far below what could reasonably be expected.

The new Senior Managers and Certification Regime (SM&CR) also came into force on 7 March, replacing the existing Approved Persons Regime for deposit takers and investment banks. It will introduce “statements of responsibility” for each senior manager, making it less easy for them to duck the blame for any breach of regulatory requirements.

Gerard Forlin QC, of Cornerstone Barristers, says: “I would be very surprised if anyone was ever convicted of this offence, but it may well act as a brake on reckless investment and behaviour by white knuckle rider bankers and employees craving an ever-increasing bonus.

“Further, interestingly, the test of the ‘decision falling far below what could reasonably be expected of a senior manager in that position’ emanates from the world of health and safety as it was originally debated by the select committee when considering the Corporate Manslaughter and Culpable Homicide Act 2007.”

Greg Brandman, partner at Eversheds, says the new criminal offence will “largely be seen as a political move”.

“Although each case will turn on its own facts, the prospects of the Crown discharging the criminal burden of proof in order to satisfy the multiple evidential hurdles required by the new offence are so remote that it is very unlikely that this offence will ever be successfully prosecuted,” he added.

However, he welcomed the SM&CR as a “very significant development in the regulation of individuals working for UK banks”.

“The previous regime was not fit for purpose and the increased clarity which the new regime requires around the scope of individual responsibilities of senior managers is generally to be welcomed.”

Issue: 7691 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Private client division announces five new partners

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Banking and finance team welcomes partner in London

NEWS
Limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are reportedly in the firing line in Chancellor Rachel Reeves upcoming Autumn budget
The landmark Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd—along with Rukhadze v Recovery Partners—redefine fiduciary duties in commercial fraud. Writing in NLJ this week, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley analyses the implications of the rulings
Barristers Ben Keith of 5 St Andrew’s Hill and Rhys Davies of Temple Garden Chambers use the arrest of Simon Leviev—the so-called Tinder Swindler—to explore the realities of Interpol red notices, in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] has upended assumptions about who may conduct litigation, warn Kevin Latham and Fraser Barnstaple of Kings Chambers in this week's NLJ. But is it as catastrophic as first feared?
Lord Sales has been appointed to become the Deputy President of the Supreme Court after Lord Hodge retires at the end of the year
back-to-top-scroll