header-logo header-logo

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

Corruption clampdown

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll