header-logo header-logo

10 July 2026
Issue: 8169 / Categories: Legal News , Company , Criminal , Liability , Risk management , Compliance
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: New offence rules widen corporate criminal exposure

254468
© Getty images
A little-noticed provision of the Crime and Policing Act 2026 has fundamentally expanded corporate criminal liability

Writing in NLJ this week, Robert Hargreaves, lecturer in law at York St John University, explains that s 250 replaces the old 'directing mind' test with a broader senior manager attribution model covering all criminal offences, not just economic crime. Crucially, there is no 'reasonable procedures' defence, meaning organisations may face liability regardless of the strength of their compliance systems.

Hargreaves says businesses should urgently review governance, training, authority structures and insurance, while also reassessing self-reporting because deferred prosecution agreements remain unavailable for many newly in-scope offences.

His warning is stark: practitioners who delay advising clients until test cases emerge 'may find that the first cases concern their own clients'. 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll