header-logo header-logo

15 April 2011 / Monty Raphael KC
Issue: 7461 + 7462 / Categories: Opinion , Bribery
printer mail-detail

Be careful what you wish for

To corrupt a slogan of the 1970s: has it taken the waiting out of wanting? We have waited 105 years, so is it what we wanted...

Will the new Bribery Act end up pleasing none of the people, none of the time, asks Monty Raphael QC

To corrupt a slogan of the 1970s: has it taken the waiting out of wanting? We have waited 105 years, so is it what we wanted? First, who is the “we” and did “we” all want the same thing?

First and foremost, the Bribery Act 2010 is a piece of domestic legislation. It sweeps away all our previous law on the subject, or it will, for conduct occurring after it comes into force on 1 July. It does away with the distinction between public and private bribery, while introducing an offence of bribing a foreign public official. This will extinguish one of the criticisms of the Bribery Working Group of the OECD. 

It also originates an offence for commercial organisations of failing

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll