header-logo header-logo

Bribery Act & the SFO

07 July 2011
Issue: 7473 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Experts predict successful start for new anti-bribery law

The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) will not bring an investigation under the new anti-bribery legislation until it has identified a case with a huge probability of success, according to a high-profile panel of legal experts.

Panelists at the Bribery Act roundtable hosted by NLJ on 1 July—the day the legislation came into force—believe that the likely first target for the SFO will be a small or medium enterprise or a whistleblower case involving a large UK multinational.

Richard Lissack QC of Outer Temple Chambers said: “The SFO will identify a case with a very high chance of conviction—to start with a losing prosecution would be unthinkable.”

The panel also included Robert Amaee, of counsel at Covington & Burling and the former head of anti-corruption/proceeds of crime at the SFO; Freshfield Bruckhaus Deringer partners Paul Lomas and Mark Sansom, and Drew Macaulay, director of business development at First Advantage Litigation Consulting.

Sansom said: “The SFO has been talking tough and has good political reasons to do so. But I doubt they will want to take a contentious point to court—such as a case testing the limits of their jurisdiction under the Act—and risk losing. We can expect them to look for a slam-dunk case as the first target. They may be particularly keen on any case involving a non-UK company which does business in the UK, in order to demonstrate the ‘level playing field’ under the Act.”

The comments came as evidence emerges that UK companies are still not taking the twice-delayed new anti-Bribery legislation seriously despite having years to prepare for it. A recent European Fraud Survey carried out by Ernst & Young found that one in seven staff polled at large UK companies were willing to offer cash payments to win business with just over half being aware of anti-bribery policy at their organisation.

Full coverage of the panel discussions will appear in an NLJ Bribery Act special later in the summer.

Issue: 7473 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
In NLJ this week, Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre marks Pro Bono Week by urging lawyers to recognise the emotional toll of pro bono work
Can a lease legally last only days—or even hours? Professor Mark Pawlowski of the University of Greenwich explores the question in this week's NLJ
RFC Seraing v FIFA, in which the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) reaffirmed that awards by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) may be reviewed by EU courts on public-policy grounds, is under examination in this week's NLJ by Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law, Zurich
back-to-top-scroll