The FCPA Report

The definitive source of actionable intelligence covering the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act

Articles By Topic

By Topic: U.K. Bribery Act

  • From Vol. 6 No.8 (Apr. 26, 2017)

    Compliance Implications of Brexit

    Britain’s formal withdrawal process from the E.U. has begun, and while E.U. treaties will shape what that process will look like, the timeline for Brexit is fluid and its effect on the European business climate is unclear. At SCCE’s 5th Annual European Compliance & Ethics Institute recently held in Prague, a panel of experts discussed the Brexit procedure, and what it may mean for compliance in the U.K. The panel included Matthew Holehouse, a journalist at MLEX Market Insight; Keith Benjamin, the global director and head of compliance for Jaguar/Land Rover; and André Bywater, a partner at Cordery Compliance. The panel was moderated by Jonathan Armstrong, who is also a partner at Cordery. See “Bribery Act Experts Discuss the Impact of Brexit, DPAs and Other U.K. Developments” (Jul. 13, 2016).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 6 No.5 (Mar. 15, 2017)

    Rolls Settlement Illuminates SFO Expectations for Cooperation and Compliance

    Rolls-Royce’s recent settlement with U.K., U.S. and Brazilian authorities was a key development in global anti-corruption enforcement. The case opens a window into what the SFO, now a major player on the field of anti-corruption enforcement, expects from companies both in terms of cooperation and remediation. That information may prove crucial for many multinational companies as U.K. enforcement continues to assert its dominance on the anti-corruption stage. See “Rolls-Royce Settlement Offers Lessons on How to Pay Commissions Without Corruption” (Feb. 15, 2017) and “SFO Arrives in the Anti-Corruption Premier League With Rolls-Royce Settlement” (Mar. 1, 2017).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 6 No.4 (Mar. 1, 2017)

    SFO Arrives in the Anti-Corruption Premier League With Rolls-Royce Settlement

    The U.K.’s Serious Fraud Office has struggled for legitimacy in recent years, with a limited number of enforcement actions under its belt and a shrinking budget. But its recent settlement with Rolls-Royce has established it as a force to be reckoned with in global anti-corruption enforcement. “The settlement catapults the SFO into the Premier League of global anti-bribery law enforcement,” said London-based Barry Vitou, head of Pinsent Masons’ corporate crime team. But is it sending mixed messages about the value of cooperation and self-reporting? For more on the settlement, see “Rolls-Royce Settlement Offers Lessons on How to Pay Commissions Without Corruption” (Feb. 15, 2017).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 6 No.3 (Feb. 15, 2017)

    Rolls-Royce Settlement Offers Lessons on How to Pay Commissions Without Corruption

    Rolls-Royce’s recent massive settlement with U.S., U.K. and Brazilian authorities is a stark reminder of the anti-corruption risks associated with intermediaries, agents and fixers when negotiating contracts with state-owned entities. Commissions paid by Rolls-Royce to its agents – including notorious oil-and-gas “solutions” provider Unaoil – often were eventually passed on to foreign officials to close deals, netting Rolls-Royce a global settlement for hundreds of millions of dollars. In this first article discussing the case, we look at the bribes Rolls-Royce paid, how its compliance program failed to prevent them and what companies can do to make sure that commissions paid to agents are not used improperly. In a second article, we will look at the implications for cooperative U.S. and U.K. enforcement and what the SFO is looking for in terms of cooperation and remediation. See “Bribery Act Experts Discuss the Impact of Brexit, DPAs and Other U.K. Developments” (Jul. 13, 2016).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 5 No.19 (Sep. 28, 2016)

    What Compliance Lessons Can Companies Learn From the SFO’s First Two DPAs?

    In July 2016, the U.K.’s Serious Fraud Office received court approval for its second-ever DPA. Both this DPA and the one before it, involving Standard Bank, are stark demonstrations of the fact that violating the U.K. Bribery Act can have serious and expensive ramifications not only for the offending company but also for others in its corporate group, even if they were unaware of the bribery. They also serve as another reminder of the dangers of using agents to win business. In a guest article, Matthew Getz and Prateek Swaika, partner and associate, respectively, at Boies, Schiller & Flexner, consider some of the lessons to be learned in this context, and what companies operating in the U.K. should do to avoid incurring liability when using agents to enter into contracts. See also “In Second DPA, SFO and U.K. Court Focus on Cooperation, Self-Reporting and Compliance” (Aug. 31, 2016).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 5 No.17 (Aug. 31, 2016)

    In Second DPA, SFO and U.K. Court Focus on Cooperation, Self-Reporting and Compliance

    Recently a U.K. court approved the second Serious Fraud Office application for a DPA. The identity of the counterparty remains confidential but is understood to be a small to medium-sized U.K. entity wholly owned by a U.S. corporation. The first DPA which was approved by the same judge in November 2015, was with Standard Bank, a regulated institution that settled for what could be perceived as a more stringent penalty. More recently, financially troubled Sweett Group was prosecuted after failing to cooperate in the SFO’s investigation. In a guest article, Elizabeth Robertson, a partner at Skadden located in London, discusses the key features of the most recent DPA and examines the differences between it, the Standard Bank case and the Sweett Group case offering insights on anti-corruption enforcement in the U.K. See “Lessons From the U.K. Sweett Group Prosecution” (Mar. 23, 2016).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 5 No.14 (Jul. 13, 2016)

    Bribery Act Experts Discuss the Impact of Brexit, DPAs and Other U.K. Developments

    In the five years since the U.K. Bribery Act took effect, there have been few prosecutions but, according to Pinsent Masons partner Barry Vitou, speaking at a recent Securities Docket webinar, now is “exactly the wrong moment” to become complacent about compliance. In fact, after the webinar, on July 8, 2016, a judge approved a deferred prosecution agreement between the Serious Fraud Office and an unnamed company to resolve bribery charges in a case that is ongoing against individuals. Vitou, along with Julian Glass, a managing director at FTI Consulting, Richard Kovalevsky QC and Vivian Robinson QC, a partner at McGuireWoods and former general counsel to the U.K.’s Serious Fraud Office, discussed recent developments in the U.K. of concern to companies, including the impact of Brexit on anti-corruption compliance and the SFO’s use of DPAs. See “SFO’s Alford Discusses Enforcement Priorities, Deferred Prosecution Agreements and Corporate Criminal Liability” (Jun. 15, 2016).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 5 No.12 (Jun. 15, 2016)

    SFO’s Alford Discusses Enforcement Priorities, Deferred Prosecution Agreements and Corporate Criminal Liability

    In light of events such as the first convictions under the U.K. Bribery Act and the first British corporate deferred prosecution agreement, how does the U.K.’s Serious Fraud Office (SFO) see its role on the domestic and international law enforcement stage? In remarks at the American Conference Institute’s recent New York Conference on the FCPA, Stuart Alford, QC, the Head of Division of the SFO, explained the operations and priorities of the SFO, with emphasis on its role in anti-corruption enforcement, deferred prosecution agreements and corporate criminal liability. See also “U.K. Anti-Corruption Summit Brings Criticism and a Touch of Déjà Vu” (Jun. 1, 2016).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 5 No.11 (Jun. 1, 2016)

    U.K. Anti-Corruption Summit Brings Criticism and a Touch of Déjà Vu

    On May 12, 2016, the U.K. hosted a much-publicized Global Anti-Corruption Summit (Summit) in London. This was not, as some believed, a response to the leak of confidential records from the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca, but an event that had been announced by U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron in a speech in Singapore on July 28, 2015, about tax evasion and tax avoidance. In a guest article, Collingwood Thompson, a barrister at London-based 7BR, explains how an emphasis on tax evasion and tax avoidance led to the Summit and discusses the key takeaways and controversies arising out of the event. See also OECD Working Group’s 2013 Report on Global Anti-Bribery Efforts Shows Lackluster Performance” (Jun. 26, 2013). 

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 5 No.6 (Mar. 23, 2016)

    Lessons From the U.K. Sweett Group Prosecution

    The U.K.’s Serious Fraud Office has completed its first prosecution under Section 7 of the Bribery Act 2010. The Sweett Group PLC was sentenced and ordered to pay £2.25 million after having admitted to failing to prevent bribery by its foreign subsidiary, Cyril Sweett International Ltd. The sentence follows the SFO’s first deferred prosecution agreement, announced last November. Several years after the Act’s introduction, and after some criticism that it has not led to prosecutions, it is slowly beginning to bear fruit. In a guest article, James Maton and Jamie Humpreys, partner and associate in Cooley’s London office, discuss the key takeaways from the decision. See also “SFO Secures First Bribery Act Convictions” (Dec. 17, 2014).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 5 No.3 (Feb. 10, 2016)

    Analyzing the Significance of the U.K. Court of Appeals Decision Allowing Pre-Bribery Act Prosecution

    The U.K. Court of Appeals has given a green light to a case alleging foreign bribery prior to the adoption of the 2010 U.K. Bribery Act, holding that the 1906 Prevention of Corruption Act applies. How much does this ruling open the door for U.K. prosecutors to charge pre-2010 foreign bribery? In a guest article, Sally J. March, a director at Drummond March Ltd, explains the case and its significance for anti-corruption enforcement in the U.K. See also “The Meaning of the U.K.’s First DPA” (Dec. 16, 2015).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 4 No.26 (Dec. 16, 2015)

    The Meaning of the U.K.’s First DPA

    Deferred Prosecution Agreements became available in the United Kingdom on February 24, 2014.  Some 18 months later, on November 30, 2015, Lord Justice Leveson approved the first one between the SFO and Standard Bank.  In a guest article, Nicola Howard, a Barrister at 25 Bedford Row, and Jonathan Armstrong and André Bywater, lawyers with specialist compliance practice Cordery, explain how the Deferred Prosecution Agreement process works in the U.K., detail the Standard Bank case and examine what the case means for future corporate settlements.  See “Standard Bank Fined by Both the SEC and the SFO in a Coordinated Settlement Featuring the First British DPA,” The FCPA Report, Vol. 4, No. 25 (Dec. 2, 2015).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 4 No.6 (Mar. 18, 2015)

    Taking Third Party Diligence Beyond the FCPA and the U.K. Bribery Act

    An active third-party due diligence program protects a company from a host of dangers, including anti-corruption violations, sanctions issues and forming relationships with destructive business partners.  A recent program presented by the Society of Corporate Compliance and Ethics highlighted the continued importance of third-party due diligence for anti-corruption compliance and the impact of economic sanctions regimes on that due diligence.  The program featured Candice D. Tal, founder and Chief Executive Officer of security and risk management consulting firm Infortal Worldwide Inc.; and Cordery Compliance Limited’s principal adviser André Bywater and partner Jonathan P. Armstrong.  See also “Risk-Based Solutions to Complying with Anti-Money Laundering, Export Controls, Economic Sanctions and the FCPA,” The FCPA Report, Vol. 3, No. 2 (Jan. 22, 2014).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 4 No.6 (Mar. 18, 2015)

    U.K. Property Market Attracts Corrupt Assets

    The booming U.K. property market may be serving as a safe haven for corrupt assets, according to a recent report by the U.K. chapter of watchdog Transparency International.  It found that the volume of property registered to anonymous companies is a “major barrier” to U.K. law enforcement investigations and interferes with effective money laundering diligence and compliance with international sanctions.  See also “Eye-Opening Report Helps Companies Tackle European Corruption Risks,” The FCPA Report, Vol. 3, No. 6 (Mar. 19, 2014).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 3 No.25 (Dec. 17, 2014)

    SFO Secures First Bribery Act Convictions

    Facing criticism for a lack of enforcement of one of the world’s toughest bribery laws, Britain’s Serious Fraud Office has secured its first convictions under the U.K. Bribery Act.  Three individuals were sentenced December 8, 2014 for the scheme involving fake investments in green biofuel.  Charges for two of the men included giving and receiving commercial bribes.  In a guest post, James Maton, Jamie Humphreys and Chimé Metok Dorjee, attorneys in Edwards Wildman Palmer’s London office, analyze the case and what it may mean for U.K. Bribery enforcement.  See also “Lessons from the Latest Anti-Corruption Developments in the U.K., Brazil and China,” The FCPA Report, Vol. 2, No. 7 (Apr. 3, 2013).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 3 No.22 (Nov. 5, 2014)

    U.K. Practitioners Discuss Trends and Prosecutions Under the Bribery Act

    The U.K.’s Bribery Act of 2010 has broad extraterritorial reach, and prohibits a wider range of conduct than the FCPA, making awareness of its enforcement and interpretation important for many multi-national companies.  A recent program organized by the Society of Corporate Compliance and Ethics (SCCE) provided an update on the Bribery Act from experienced U.K. practitioners.  Margaret Hambleton, CCO of Dignity Health and SCCE Board Member, hosted the program.  The speakers were Jonathan Armstrong, a partner in U.K. solicitors firm Cordery Legal Compliance, and André Bywater, a principal advisor at that firm.  See also “Corruption Risks and Anti-Corruption Strategies in the E.U.,” The FCPA Report, Vol. 3, No. 10 (May 14, 2014).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 3 No.16 (Aug. 6, 2014)

    International Anti-Corruption Enforcement Roundup

    In this issue, we cover the sentencing of four Innospec executives in the U.K. for bribes in Indonesia and Iraq, and the Wells Notice issued to Cobalt International Energy by the SEC regarding an FCPA investigation into activity in Angola.  Plus, more anti-corruption enforcement activity against Alstom: bribery charges will reportedly be leveled against ex-employees by the U.K.’s SFO and in Brazil, Sao Paulo prosecutors allege Alstom bribed an ex-government official through a Swiss account.  Also, developments in two FCPA-related individual cases in the U.S. – French citizen Frederic Cilins gets 24 months in prison for obstructing an FCPA investigation and the former BizJet president pleads guilty to bribing officials in Mexico and Panama.  The South Korean government sets up a task force to stamp out corruption.  And, adding to GSK’s corruption troubles: a whistleblower alleges the company paid bribes in Syria.

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 3 No.13 (Jun. 25, 2014)

    British Bankers’ Association Provides Guidance to Help Financial Institutions Avoid Liability Under the U.K. Bribery Act

    The British Bankers’ Association (BBA), the trade association for the U.K.’s banking and financial services sector, has recently refreshed its guidance on the steps that banks should take to comply with the U.K. Bribery Act 2010.  Despite its industry focus, the BBA Guidance contains a number of recommendations that will be valuable to any large company when implementing an anti-bribery compliance program.  In a guest article, Jeremy Cole and Alex Hohl, consultant and senior associate, respectively, in Hogan Lovells’ London office, provide a recap of some of the key features of the Bribery Act and consider the role of the U.K.’s financial regulator in pushing companies to take the implementation of anti-bribery measures seriously.  They also examine the BBA Guidance, which not only builds on the official guidance on anti-bribery compliance published by the U.K.’s Ministry of Justice in March 2011, but also looks beyond the Bribery Act to take into account the requirements that the U.K.’s regulatory regime places on financial institutions in this area. See “Corruption Risks and Anti-Corruption Strategies in the E.U.,” The FCPA Report, Vol. 3, No. 10 (May 14, 2014).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 3 No.10 (May 14, 2014)

    Corruption Risks and Anti-Corruption Strategies in the E.U.

    Europe may not be an emerging market, but, as the European Commission’s first Anti-Corruption Report detailed, there are pervasive corruption risks in Europe that companies must navigate; risks made more pressing by increased anti-corruption enforcement in the E.U. as well as the evolving requirements of the laws there.  In a recent Strafford Publications webinar, K&L Gates partner Edward J. Fishman, along with associates Laura Atherton from the firm’s London office and Isabelle De Smedt from the firm’s Brussels office, examined the corruption risks in the region and offered strategies for mitigating those risks.  The panelists reviewed the E.C.’s February Anti-Corruption Report, the related climate of corruption and the existing corruption laws and shared best practices for an effective compliance program.  See also “Eye-Opening Report Helps Companies Tackle European Corruption Risks,” The FCPA Report, Vol. 3, No. 6 (Mar. 19, 2014).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 3 No.6 (Mar. 19, 2014)

    Eye-Opening Report Helps Companies Tackle European Corruption Risks  

    "Breathtaking” is how one European Commissioner characterized the corruption described in the European Commission’s February 2014 Anti-Corruption Report, which details each E.U. Member State’s efforts in fighting corruption and provides advice for improving the effectiveness of those efforts.  In a guest article, Antonio Suarez-Martinez and James Maton, partners in Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP’s London office, analyze the Report and the relevant takeaways for companies doing business in Member States.  For more insight from Edwards Wildman, see “Collateral Consequences of Bribery: When Can Ethical Competitors Initiate Suit in the U.S. and U.K.?,” The FCPA Report, Vol. 2, No. 10 (May 15, 2013).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 3 No.5 (Mar. 5, 2014)

    Deferred Prosecution Agreements Come into Force in the U.K.

    The U.K. will now be using Deferred Prosecution Agreements to resolve certain cases.  Similar to U.S.-styled DPAs, British DPAs are agreements between prosecutors and corporations that charges will be presented but not pursued, provided the organization complies with a set of agreed-upon terms and conditions.  Those terms and conditions generally involve payment of substantial fines and/or the implementation of remediation programs.  In a guest article, Elizabeth Robertson, Laura Atherton and Sasi-Kanth Mallela, partner, associate and special counsel, respectively, in K&L Gates’ London office, say that the advent of DPAs will be broadly welcomed by the business community but their application in the U.K. will not be without its controversies.   They consider some of the issues likely to arise as DPAs, which will be implemented in some significantly different ways than they are in the U.S., find their feet in the U.K.  See FCPA Corporate Settlements of 2013: Details, Trends and Compliance Takeaways,” The FCPA Report, Vol. 2, No. 25 (Dec. 18, 2013).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 3 No.3 (Feb. 5, 2014)

    A Comparison of Anti-Bribery Laws in the U.S., U.K., China, Germany and India

    In this era of increasing international cooperation, anti-corruption compliance programs cannot consider only the FCPA.  Various anti-bribery regimes must be addressed in a multi-national company’s program to adequately protect the company from the growing threat of global enforcement and “carbon copy” prosecutions.  This chart, developed by T. Markus Funk and Sambo “Bo” Dul, partner and associate, respectively, at Perkins Coie LLP, helps with the task of creating a comprehensive anti-bribery program by comparing the main provisions of five anti-bribery laws that companies should be wary of – laws in the U.S., the U.K., China, Germany and India.  See “Assessing the Year in FCPA Enforcement and Looking Ahead,” The FCPA Report, Vol. 3, No. 2 (Jan. 22, 2014) (T. Markus Funk and Bo Dul).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 2 No.21 (Oct. 23, 2013)

    K&L Gates Panel Reviews Anti-Corruption Enforcement in the U.S., the U.K., China, Australia, Latin America, Africa, Southeast Asia and Russia

    With the spate of new anti-corruption laws around the globe, and the evolution of laws already on the books, “it is critical for a company to have on-the-ground information and local support” in structuring an effective anti-bribery and anti-corruption (ABAC) program and responding to regulatory action in all of the regions in which it operates.  So said Dick Thornburgh, former Attorney General of the United States and former Governor of Pennsylvania, introducing a recent webinar presented by K&L Gates LLP, where Thornburgh is now of counsel.  The K&L Gates speakers who followed Thornburgh shared their direct local experiences and examined the state of the ABAC laws in their regions of speciality.

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 2 No.15 (Jul. 24, 2013)

    U.K. Practitioners Discuss the Prospect of Enforcement Actions Under the U.K. Bribery Act, Advantages of Deferred Prosecution Agreements and Proposed Sentencing Guidelines

    What was all the fuss about?  The U.K. Bribery Act was adopted in 2010 and took effect in 2011.  Since then, there have been no prosecutions of corporations under the Act and only two formal investigations are known to be underway.  Experienced U.K. practitioners warn that the “fuss” may be proven justified soon, however, and companies should not be complacent.  In a recent webinar, experts cautioned that “enforcement is coming.”  They also discussed the availability of DPAs under the Bribery Act, the continuing utility of civil recovery orders and the proposed sentencing guidelines issued with respect to the Bribery Act.  This article summarizes the key lessons from the webinar.  See also Strategies for Implementing the U.K. Bribery Act’s Requirement of Adequate Procedures for Intermediaries,” The FCPA Report, Vol. 2, No. 3 (Feb. 6, 2013).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 2 No.10 (May 15, 2013)

    Collateral Consequences of Bribery: When Can Ethical Competitors Initiate Suit in the U.S. and U.K.?

    The potential fines and costs arising from corporate bribery can be sizeable.  But there is another risk for companies that have won government contracts because they bribed foreign officials: private lawsuits brought by clean competitors that have lost out on business as a result of bribery.  In an age of ever-increasing public information about bribery, from governments, non-governmental organizations, anti-corruption activists and others, competitors on the losing side of bidding processes have more evidence to pursue these claims.  In a guest article, Steve Huggard and James Maton, partners, and Katie Guarino, associate, at Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP, explain how suits against bribing competitors can be initiated and what is at stake.

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 2 No.7 (Apr. 3, 2013)

    Lessons from the Latest Anti-Corruption Developments in the U.K., Brazil and China

    A single-minded focus on the FCPA with a passing nod to other countries’ regulatory regimes is not enough to make a company’s compliance program first-in-class today; multinational companies must fully address an array of global anti-bribery laws in an environment of growing global enforcement and increased prosecutorial vigor.  Regulatory regimes in other countries may not be consistent with existing company compliance programs.  In a recent webinar, partners from Hogan Lovells shared their insight and experience on navigating the latest global developments in anti-bribery and corruption regulation and enforcement.  This article conveys the highlights from the discussion, focusing primarily on the anti-corruption regimes in China, the U.K. and Brazil.

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 2 No.3 (Feb. 6, 2013)

    Strategies for Implementing the U.K. Bribery Act’s Requirement of Adequate Procedures for Intermediaries

    Intermediaries are crucial to many businesses, sometimes even mandatory, and are replete with corruption risk – under both the FCPA and the U.K. Bribery Act, they can generate criminal liability for their principals if they bribe to win business.  In many jurisdictions, intermediaries are routinely used to enter markets; to identify opportunities; to access and build relationships with decision-makers responsible for awarding contracts, including public officials; to assist with navigating complex local laws, regulations and customs; and to win business.  How can a company mitigate the risks these ubiquitous third parties pose?  In a guest article, James Maton, a partner in Edwards Wildman Palmer UK LLP’s London office, provides strategies to that end by reference to the requirements of the U.K. Bribery Act, one of the most comprehensive anti-bribery statutes in the world, with broad application to global activities connected to the U.K.  It requires companies and partnerships to have adequate procedures intended to prevent bribery in both their private and public sector business activities.  Maton’s article considers the key principles that should underpin those procedures, and the steps an organisation can take to reduce the bribery risks posed by intermediaries.

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 1 No.14 (Dec. 12, 2012)

    Recent Developments in U.K. Bribery Act Enforcement: SFO Head Green Speaks, Abbot Group Settles and Rolls-Royce Reveals Bribery Investigation

    There is growing concern that the U.K. Bribery Act 2010 (Bribery Act), which took effect in July 2011, may pose more serious risks for multinational businesses than the FCPA.  This is due, in part, to the fact that the Bribery Act extends to private as well as government bribery and does not have an exception for “facilitating payments.”  On November 13, 2012, David Green CB QC, who is the Director of the U.K.’s Serious Frauds Office (SFO), gave testimony before the Justice Committee of the House of Commons.  His testimony provides insight into how, under his direction, the SFO may be expected to approach anti-corruption efforts in general, and enforcement of the Bribery Act in particular, especially with regard to self-reporting and deferred prosecution agreements.  In other recent U.K. developments, Scotland’s Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service announced its first-ever civil settlement.  The government reached an agreement with Abbot Group Limited arising out of overseas corrupt payments, and Rolls-Royce plc announced that it had reported to the SFO information with respect to bribery and corruption involving overseas intermediaries.  This article highlights the key take-aways of Green’s testimony that are relevant to anti-bribery enforcement and summarizes the Abbot and Rolls-Royce matters.  For more on the mechanics of the Bribery Act, see “Finding Clarity in the New U.K. Bribery Act,” The FCPA Report, Vol. 1, No. 12 (Nov. 14, 2012).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 1 No.12 (Nov. 14, 2012)

    Finding Clarity in the New U.K. Bribery Act

    The U.K.’s Ministry of Justice has added another tool to its arsenal – like the U.S., it intends to use Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs) for cases of economic crime, following a recent consultation and the overhaul of U.K. Bribery laws in July of last year.  That overhaul replaced elderly bribery laws regarded as ineffective to prosecute modern cases.  The new Bribery Act 2011 (Act) provides a consolidated scheme of offences and, unlike the FCPA, applies to bribery in both the public and private sectors.  Law enforcement agencies in the U.K. had two main mechanisms to deal with bribery and other economic crime by companies: criminal prosecution (followed by confiscation of illicit assets), or civil recovery under legislation which enables prosecutors to make a claim against a company to recover the proceeds of criminal conduct.  DPAs will offer a third option.  In a guest article, James Maton, a partner in Edwards Wildman Palmer UK LLP’s London office, provides details about the provisions of the Act and guidance issued by the U.K., and the government’s new policy on DPAs.  A forthcoming article in The FCPA Report will address specific actions companies can take in light of this new enforcement landscape in the U.K.

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 1 No.10 (Oct. 17, 2012)

    Britain’s Serious Fraud Office Updates Guidance on the Bribery Act, Reinforcing Its Role as a Crime Fighting Agency

    While much of the U.S. anti-corruption community was focused on the expected arrival of FCPA guidance from the DOJ and the SEC, on October 9, 2012, the Serious Fraud Office (SFO), the U.K.’s agency with primary responsibility for enforcing the Bribery Act, beat them to the punch, releasing new guidelines relating to certain aspects of the Act in a tone that emphasizes the importance the SFO is placing on targeting bribery.  This article details the substance of the guidance and its implications for operating companies.

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 1 No.8 (Sep. 19, 2012)

    Grant Thornton Webinar Highlights FCPA and U.K. Bribery Act Compliance Trends (Part Two of Two)

    On August 21, 2012, Grant Thornton hosted a webinar entitled “Evolving Anti-Corruption Legislation: Is your business up-to-date?”  The program provided a helpful overview of trends in FCPA enforcement and enforcement of the U.K.’s Bribery Act of 2010 (Bribery Act), including the potentially broad reach of the Bribery Act, and guidance on best practices for anti-corruption compliance.  The FCPA Report is covering the webinar in a two-part article series.  This article, the second part, focuses on compliance trends.  The first part focused on enforcement trends.  See “Grant Thornton Webinar Highlights FCPA and U.K. Bribery Act Enforcement Trends (Part One of Two),” The FCPA Report, Vol. 1, No. 7 (Sep. 5, 2012).

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 1 No.7 (Sep. 5, 2012)

    Grant Thornton Webinar Highlights FCPA and U.K. Bribery Act Enforcement Trends (Part One of Two)

    On August 21, 2012, Grant Thornton hosted a webinar entitled “Evolving Anti-Corruption Legislation: Is your business up-to-date?”  The program provided a helpful overview of trends in FCPA enforcement and enforcement of the U.K.’s Bribery Act of 2010 (Bribery Act), including the potentially broad reach of the Bribery Act, and guidance on best practices for anti-corruption compliance.  The FCPA Report is covering the webinar in a two-part article series.  This article, the first part, focuses on enforcement trends, and the second part will focus on compliance.  The participants in the panel were Sterl Greenhalgh and Bill Olsen of international accounting and auditing firm Grant Thornton UK and Grant Thornton US LLP, respectively, and Vivian Robinson of law firm McGuire Woods UK.  Greenhalgh is Grant Thornton UK’s head of anti-bribery and corruption.  Olsen, Grant Thornton’s U.S. leader of Anti-Corruption services and Global Investigations, authored “The Anti-Corruption Handbook.”  Robinson was previously General Counsel to the U.K.’s Serious Fraud Office, which has primary responsibility for enforcing the Bribery Act.  Robinson led the development of the SFO’s enforcement policy under the Bribery Act.

    Read Full Article …