header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
12 May 2011 / Tracey Stretton
Issue: 7465 / Categories: Features , Bribery , Regulatory , Profession
printer mail-detail

Managing global corruption

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Tracey Stretton offers some strategies for avoiding & managing regulatory violations

Last year the US government levied hefty fines against businesses engaged in corrupt practices. Daimler AG agreed to pay $185m in fines and penalties and BAE Systems plc paid a $400m criminal fine to the US government and a €30m fine to UK regulators. The US is not alone in its quest to stamp out bribery and corruption—there has been a global increase in investigations, not only into bribery and corruption, but also into cartels and breaches of securities laws.

EU cartel settlements reached £3bn in 2010 with more potentially significant cases in the pipeline (“Rise in EU Anti-trust Settlements Anticipated”, 23 December 2010, FT.com). There has also been an expansion of the scope of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) in the US.

Regulators are extending their territorial reach, co-operating across borders and talking about becoming more proactive in seeking out corrupt practices. Given the severe penalties and reputational damage associated with regulatory breaches companies need to adopt a proactive

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

Read All
Sidley—James Inness

Sidley—James Inness

Partner joins capital markets team in London office

Haynes Boone—William Cecil

Haynes Boone—William Cecil

Firm announces appointment of partner as UK general counsel

Devonshires—Nicholas Barrows

Devonshires—Nicholas Barrows

Firm appoints first chief marketing officer to drive growth strategy

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Appeal court reins in ‘wrong defendant’ switcheroo

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: CPR tweak closes third-party disclosure gap
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
NLJ this week: Court of Appeals wrestles with Mazur fallout
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’
NLJ this week: Driving test fraudsters steer towards jail
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
NLJ this week: Deepfakes demand data law muscle
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll