header-logo header-logo

21 June 2007 / Stephen Baker
Issue: 7278 / Categories: Opinion , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Letting Woolf in the door

Stephen Baker considers the implications of BAE’s decision to appoint Lord Woolf to head up its ethics committee

It may be thought that things have to get pretty desperate before a company hires not lawyers, but a whole judge, to try and salvage its reputation.
Earlier this month we learned that BAE Systems has appointed former Lord Chief Justice Lord Woolf to chair a new independent ethics committee. The committee will review BAE’s current and future policies for compliance with anti-corruption laws and conventions. Though it is unclear precisely what Lord Woolf’s team will be doing, it is understood he will not be encouraged to reopen the Serious Fraud Office’s (SFO’s) abandoned inquiry into alleged Saudi bribes.

ensuring independence

BAE has gone further than any other major company. Many companies, particularly in the US, have internal ethics committees, and publish annual in-house reports on their compliance with ethical standards. Some appoint well-known figures to their boards to ensure, or at least give the impression, that someone independent is keeping an eye on their

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

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise expands London secondaries team with addition of Mary Lavelle

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law welcomes ex-Irwin Mitchell team to launch Hestia Private Client

Carpmaels & Ransford—Christopher Stothers

Carpmaels & Ransford—Christopher Stothers

Heavyweight patent litigator will bolster Carpmaels Ransford’s rapidly growing Litigation team as firm marks its 250th anniversary

NEWS
Lawyers have welcomed plans to create specialist rape and serious sex offences courtrooms at every Crown Court
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
back-to-top-scroll