header-logo header-logo

Corruption clampdown

15 April 2010
Issue: 7413 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Unlimited fines and 10 years’ imprisonment possible for contravening Bribery Act

UK businesses face tough penalties if they attempt to bribe overseas officials following a major overhaul of anti-corruption laws.
The Bribery Act 2010, which received Royal Assent last week, increases penalties for bribery and introduces new offences of bribery of foreign public officials and corporate failure to prevent bribery. Companies are required to have “adequate processes” in place to prevent such attempts.

Contravention could lead to up to 10 years in prison or unlimited fines. The corporate offence of failure to prevent bribery is punishable by an unlimited fine.

The Act is due to come into force in stages later this year.

Will Kenyon, partner, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, says: “UK companies have a new set of risks to navigate with the introduction of this legislation.
“The Act introduces a new crime of ‘failure to prevent’ bribery which means that companies unable to demonstrate that they have implemented ‘adequate procedures’ to prevent corrupt practices within their ranks or by third parties on their behalf could be exposed to unlimited fines as well as other collateral consequences, such as debarment from government business.”

The chances of detection and successful prosecution are increasing due to greater cross-border collaboration between international enforcement agencies, he says.

“Many companies will need to review how they behave to avoid being caught by the Act. It is important to remember that, from an organisation’s point of view, bribery is a lot more than just a legal issue.

“It is driven by law but the real challenges are for management—implementing and maintaining the right processes, controls, governance and culture and encouraging the right values and behaviours. All companies should review their risk profile and anti-bribery programmes.”

John Smart, head of Ernst & Young’s fraud investigation dispute services team, says all UK businesses needed to take action against corruption “from the Board to the shop floor”.

“Bribery and corruption risk doesn’t only come from within, business needs to ask what is being done in its name,” he says.

“Agents, consultants, distributors, joint ventures and new acquisitions create exposures which can be difficult to assess but these are precisely the areas where the risk can be greatest. Organisations need to look carefully at the due diligence they carry out on third parties who act on their behalf.”

 

Issue: 7413 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll