header-logo header-logo

20 August 2013
Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

First SFO bribery prosecution

Businessmen to face court in relation to alleged £23m fraud

The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) is to bring its first prosecution under the Bribery Act 2010 next month.

The SFO is bringing fraud charges against a group of businessmen associated with the sale of bio-fuel investment products to UK investors by Sustainable AgroEnergy Plc. Three of the men have also been charged with offences of making and accepting a financial advantage contrary to ss 1(1) and 2(1) of the 2010 Act. All the defendants will appear before Westminster Magistrates’ Court in September.

The value of the alleged fraud is approximately £23m and the offences are said to have taken place between April 2011 and February 2012. The company and its parent company, Sustainable Growth Group, were placed in administration last year.

Forensic accounting specialist Andrew Maclay, director at BDO, said: “At long last, we have a proper prosecution under the Bribery Act.  

“Sustainable AgroEnergy Plc may not be a household name, but this seems to be just the sort of fraud and bribery case that the SFO should be investigating under the Bribery Act. At first glance a £23m fraud in Cambodia may seem to be of little relevance to the UK until one understands the impact on some 1,500 SIPP savers who had invested in the company. 

“What is particularly encouraging is how the UK’s SFO and Cambodian Anti Corruption Unit have worked together on this. With four Sustainable AgroEnergy executives awaiting trial in the UK and the company chairman sampling the delights of Phnom Penh’s Prey Sar prison, the Bribery Act would appear to be working on the global basis it was designed for. 

“Once the dust settles it will be interesting to see whether this bribery case opens the door for the investors who lost out to recover their money — in that a successful prosecution should be followed by a criminal confiscation and compensation order against those who are found guilty — although the chances of them having £23m of personal assets available to compensate the investors may be slim.”

The Crown Prosecution Service has prosecuted other individuals under the 2010 Act, which came into force in July, 2011, but this is the first time the SFO has brought charges.

In 2011, Munir Patel, a magistrates’ court clerk, became the first person to be convicted under the Act when he admitted accepting a £500 bribe not to enter a speeding charge on the court’s database.

 

Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers to be joined by leading family law set, 4 Brick Court, this summer

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Real estate and construction energy offering boosted by partner hire

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Firm bolsters real estate team with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS
A wave of housing and procedural reforms is set to test the limits of tribunal capacity. In his latest Civil Way column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold charts sweeping change as the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 begins biting
Plans to reduce jury trials risk missing the real problem in the criminal justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, David Wolchover of Ridgeway Chambers argues the crown court backlog is fuelled not by juries but weak cases slipping through a flawed ‘50%’ prosecution test
Emerging technologies may soon transform how courts determine truth in deeply personal disputes. In this week's NLJ, Madhavi Kabra of 1 Hare Court and Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers explore how neurotechnology could reshape family law
A controversial protest case has reignited debate over the limits of free expression. In NLJ this week, Nicholas Dobson examines a Quran-burning incident testing public order law
The courts have drawn a firm line under attempts to extend arbitration appeals. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed of the University of Leicester highlights that if the High Court refuses permission under s 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, that is the end
back-to-top-scroll