Corporate crime update...
Bribery and corruption
| Bribery Act to be reviewedIt appears that the Bribery Act is to be reviewed as part of measures aimed at assessing and easing regulatory burdens on business. Although the MoJ still claims that the guidance to be issued in relation to the section 7 offence will be issued in the next couple of weeks. | |
| Transparency International survey highlights rise in corruptionAccording to Transparency International's Global Corruption Barometer 2010, a worldwide public opinion survey on corruption, six out of ten people believe that corruption has increased over the last three years. One in every four people of the 91,000 surveyed reported paying bribes in the last year. In Europe and North America 73 per cent and 67 per cent of people respectively think corruption has increased over the past three years. Seven out ten people surveyed stated that they would be willing to report an incident of bribery. The biggest number of reported bribery payments in 2010 were in Afghanistan, Cambodia, Cameroon, India, Iraq, Liberia, Nigeria, Palestine, Senegal, Sierra Leone and Uganda where more than 50 per cent of people surveyed paid a bribe in the past 12 months. |
| Ford Germany Employees probed amid bribery and corruption allegationsProsecutors in Germany have searched the homes and offices of Ford Motor Co. employees and suppliers in Cologne and Leverkusen as part of a probe into fraud and bribery allegations. It is alleged that employees at a Ford unit accepted payments from Ford's business partners. The case stems from a similar investigation by prosecutors in Saarbruecken, Germany. | |
| Court of Appeal rules conviction under the Public Bodies Corrupt Practices Act 1889 unsafeThe Court of Appeal in R v Matthew Webster ruled that a conviction under section 1(2) of the Public Bodies Corrupt Practices Act 1889 read together with section 2 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1916 (PCA) was unsafe as section 2 of PCA placed a reverse burden of proof on the offender and unjustifiably interfered with the presumption of innocence under Article 6(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights 1950. Mr. Webster was tried at Cambridge Crown Court on indictment for (1) "corruptly" giving a gift ( of a DVD/VCR recorder) (2) "corruptly" crediting, as a gift, the sum of £100 to a PayPal account and (3) "corruptly" giving a gift of £100 in each case to an employee of Cambridgeshire County Council. Mr. Webster was found guilty at Cambridge Crown Court on the charge of "corruptly" giving a gift of £100 but this conviction was overturned on appeal. The Court of Appeal, upholding the appeal, held that section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 permitted the court to read down section 2 so as to require the offender to discharge an evidential burden rather than the legal burden of proof. | |
| SECAccording to various Wall Street news sources the SEC is exploring the relationship between Sovereign Wealth Funds and American financial funds and in particular the SEC is wanting to know if private equity companies, banks and other financial corporates are violating bribery laws in their efforts to win contracts with government investment funds. |
Terrorist financing/sanctions/money laundering
HM Treasury revises Iran Sanctions RegulationsHM Treasury has revised the Iran (European Union Financial Sanctions) Regulations 2010(the Regulations). Key changes include:
|
|
| EU amends Ivory Coast SanctionsThe EU has amended Council Regulation (EC) No 560/2005 to provide for the EU to list, separately to the UN, persons obstructing the process of peace and national reconciliation, and in particular who are jeopardising the proper outcome of the electoral process in the Ivory Coast (Annex IA)(see EU 25/2011). |
Market Abuse/Insider dealing/FSA enforcement
Senior manager found guilty of insider dealing and money laundering
|
|
| FSA fines and bans former stockbrokers for market abuseThe FSA has fined former stockbrokers William Coppin £70,000 and Perry Bliss £30,000 for using inside information about an AIM-traded company, Provexis plc, to encourage their clients to buy its shares. Coppin and Bliss, on receipt of inside information from a work colleague, disclosed to clients that Provexis plc was about to announce a major contract which would substantially increase its share price. Using this information, Coppin and Bliss encouraged some of their clients to buy shares in Provexis Plc. Provexis Plc's share price increased by 19.81% from the closing price on the previous day on announcement of the contract. The FSA found that the stockbrokers' actions were deliberate and amounted to market abuse. | |
| Five charged with insider dealingFive individuals have been charged by the FSA with 17 counts of insider dealing contrary to section 52 of the Criminal Justice Act 1993. James Sanders, co-owner and a director of Blue Index Limited (Blue Index), and his wife Miranda Sanders were jointly charged with seven offences of insider dealing relating to trading ahead of seven different takeover announcements. Mr Sanders was also charged with three offences of disclosing inside information contrary to section 52 of the Criminal Justice Act 1993. James Sanders was charged with Christopher Hossain, a senior trader of Blue Index with offences of encouraging clients of Blue Index to trade in Contracts for Differences and Christopher Hossain was also charged with an offence of insider dealing for trading before a takeover announcement. James Swallow, co-owner and a director of Blue Index has been charged with three offences of insider dealing relating to his trading ahead of three separate takeover announcements. A former employee of Blue Index, Adam Buck, has been charged with one offence of insider dealing for trading ahead of a takeover announcement. The offences are alleged to have taken place between October 2006 and February 2008. |
Disclaimer
The articles published on this website, current at the dates of publication set out above, are for reference purposes only. They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought separately before taking any action.