The bill bringing bribery from the backwater to the forefront
It is ironic that legislation as heavily debated and with such a potentially far-reaching impact such as the Bribery Act should be among those rushed through in the last few days of the current Government. The much-disputed statute is set to take the UK from the backwaters to the forefront of bribery and corruption legislation when it comes into effect later this year.
April 21, 2010 at 07:04 PM
3 minute read
Businesses set to come under scrutiny as long-awaited bribery law is enacted
It is ironic that legislation as heavily debated and with such a potentially far-reaching impact such as the Bribery Act should be among those rushed through in the last few days of the current Government. The much-disputed statute is set to take the UK from the backwaters to the forefront of bribery and corruption legislation when it comes into effect later this year.
Over recent years the UK has been subject to strong international criticism, not least from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, to provide greater clarity in the field of bribery which until now was largely covered piecemeal under an amalgamation of separate acts. And with many partners claiming this clarification is long overdue, there is certainly a large contingent of lawyers relieved to see the bill pass.
However, it seems some clients are questioning whether the legislation has gone a step too far. For law firms, new legislation means new work, but the question the UK's top corporate and anti-corruption lawyers cannot answer is whether the law will be another impediment to the competitiveness of UK businesses.
With the new laws harsher and significantly more far-reaching than those of the US, whose Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) is feared and respected by business worldwide, the worry is that strict enforcement in the UK could mean that economy-boosting cross-border business going forward will search out more lenient jurisdictions.
General counsel suddenly have a whole lot more on their plate, with the Act making companies liable for operations carried out by a third party on their behalf – a particular concern for any overseas affiliates. The legislation also has a greater reach than the FCPA, placing an onus on foreign companies that have business in the UK to put in place 'adequate procedures' throughout their international business.
A whole host of City firms have jumped on the bandwagon and are targeting clients to advise on the new legislation, stressing that they need to be preparing best practice before the law comes into effect. Partners are now specifically approaching clients in sectors reliant on high-risk jurisdictions where bribes and 'grease payments' are part of the daily course of business.
And law firms say that while they are still awaiting further guidance – the Secretary of State will produce a document before October – they are not completely at a loss in the meantime, with companies able to fall back on similar strategies as those taken for money-laundering and other risk compliance issues. But, as one senior City anti-corruption partner puts it, there is really only one piece of advice a lawyer can give, and that is to abide by the law. For certain sectors, that means telling the client to completely overhaul the way it does business – not something they want to hear.
And as several partners have pointed out, it is worth remembering that law firms themselves are not immune to the legislation. There is still some issue over the clarity of the wording concerning gifts and expenditures, so make sure that client lunch was for the purposes of improving working relationships and not intended to affect the way they choose to do business.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllIs KPMG’s Arizona ABS Strategy a Turning Point in U.S. Law? What London’s Experience Reveals
5 minute readKPMG Moves to Provide Legal Services in the US—Now All Eyes Are on Its Big Four Peers
International Arbitration: Key Developments of 2024 and Emerging Trends for 2025
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'A Death Sentence for TikTok'?: Litigators and Experts Weigh Impact of Potential Ban on Creators and Data Privacy
- 2Bribery Case Against Former Lt. Gov. Brian Benjamin Is Dropped
- 3‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
- 4State Appeals Court Revives BraunHagey Lawsuit Alleging $4.2M Unlawful Wire to China
- 5Invoking Trump, AG Bonta Reminds Lawyers of Duties to Noncitizens in Plea Dealing
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250