header-logo header-logo

Getting corporates in the dock

14 November 2025 / Tom McNeill
Issue: 8139 / Categories: Features , Criminal , Fraud , Bribery , Company , Compliance , Risk management
printer mail-detail
235678
The senior manager test—as set out in the Crime and Policing Bill—prioritises deterrence over strict legal fairness, writes Tom McNeill
  • The Crime and Policing Bill includes a senior manager test, making organisations criminally liable for offences committed by senior managers while acting within their authority.
  • This would expand corporate liability for many offences beyond principles that required proof of direct corporate fault.
  • The change reflects a broader shift towards treating corporate culture as culpable, prioritising deterrence and ease of prosecution over fairness or consistency.

The Crime and Policing Bill, which is currently working its way through the UK Parliament, has its fair share of critics—and not without good reason.

The Bill includes a provision to make organisations criminally liable for any offence committed by a senior manager while acting within the actual or apparent scope of their authority—the senior manager test. Various commentators have pointed out the unfairness that could arise by not including an ‘intending to benefit the organisation’ provision.

What if the

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

Hamlins—Maddox Legal

Hamlins—Maddox Legal

London firm announces acquisition of corporate team

Ward Hadaway—Nik Tunley

Ward Hadaway—Nik Tunley

Head of corporate appointed following Teesside merger

Taylor Rose—Russell Jarvis

Taylor Rose—Russell Jarvis

Firm expands into banking and finance sector with newly appointed head of banking

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll