header-logo header-logo

03 August 2012 / Katherine Hardcastle
Issue: 7525 / Categories: Features , Company , Criminal
printer mail-detail

The long arm of the law

Katherine Hardcastle examines the extra-territorial ambit of the Serious Crime Act 2007

One aspect of the debate surrounding the Bribery Act 2010 has been its broad extra-territorial reach. By contrast, little attention has been paid to the extra-territorial ambit of the Serious Crime Act 2007 (SCA 2007) and the offences of encouraging or assisting an offence. This might be thought surprising, given these offences possess an equally striking jurisdictional scope to the bribery offences and may be equally important in an international business context. Liability under ss 44, 45 or 46 of SCA 2007 may arise where an English-incorporated company advises a Dutch client, for example, on the execution of a financial transaction in Zimbabwe, even though the client could commit no offence if it was to carry out that transaction. This article offers an overview of the extra-territoriality provisions of SCA 2007 and aims to highlight some of the issues they raise.

The nature of extra-territorial jurisdiction

Before turning to SCA 2007, however, it is helpful, briefly, to say

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

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
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

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll