header-logo header-logo

06 September 2007 / Khawar Qureshi KC
Issue: 7287 / Categories: Features , Regulatory
printer mail-detail

Perilous times

Is the UK/EU approach to corporation regulation too heavy-handed? Khawar Qureshi QC reports

To understand the present approach to corporate regulation in the UK, it is necessary to appreciate the philosophical dilemma presented by the fact that a company is a creature of law, and to hold it liable under criminal law invariably involves blaming an individual or individuals whose conduct is (artificially) imputed to the company.

Hence, recent trends towards placing greater responsibility upon companies by means of legal regulation are designed to “persuade” them to develop practices and due diligence-based systems, which are aimed at making wrong-doing less likely. It is for that reason that companies may, for example, face big penalties vis-à-vis cartel behaviour or corporate manslaughter charges when it is apparent that systems were not in place, were deliberately overridden, or failed to prevent wrongdoing.

Different societies use their own methods to try to ensure that companies operate within the ambit of the rule of law. However, the use of statute to “put down markers”, combined with the activities of

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll