Bribery Act 2010 Landmark Cases
🔹 Overview of the Bribery Act 2010
The Bribery Act 2010 is the UK’s primary legislation addressing bribery and corruption. It is known for its strict and comprehensive framework, which applies both domestically and internationally. The Act criminalizes:
Offering, promising, or giving a bribe (active bribery).
Requesting, agreeing to receive, or accepting a bribe (passive bribery).
Bribery of foreign public officials.
Failure of commercial organizations to prevent bribery by associated persons (corporate liability).
Key features:
Applies to UK companies and individuals worldwide.
Introduced a strict liability offence for failure to prevent bribery.
Penalties include unlimited fines, imprisonment (up to 10 years), and reputational damage.
🔹 Landmark Bribery Act 2010 Cases
1. SFO v. Rolls-Royce plc (2017)
Background:
Rolls-Royce faced investigations for widespread bribery and corruption in multiple countries to secure contracts.
Outcome:
Rolls-Royce agreed to pay £497 million in penalties in a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA).
The company admitted failures to prevent bribery under Section 7 of the Act.
Agreed to overhaul its compliance and governance.
Significance:
One of the largest DPAs under the Bribery Act.
Showcased the Act’s reach into multinational corporations.
Emphasized corporate responsibility to prevent bribery by associated persons.
2. SFO v. Skansen Interiors Ltd (2018)
Background:
Skansen Interiors, a UK-based company, was charged with failure to prevent bribery related to contracts awarded in the Middle East.
Outcome:
The company pleaded guilty and was fined £4 million.
This was one of the first convictions under the strict liability corporate offence.
Significance:
Demonstrated application of the “failure to prevent bribery” offence.
Highlighted importance of robust anti-bribery procedures.
Sent a warning to SMEs and large companies alike.
3. SFO v. Alstom Network UK Ltd (2014)
Background:
Alstom, a multinational company, admitted to bribing foreign officials to win contracts.
Outcome:
The company entered into a DPA, paying £5.4 million in fines.
Admitted to failures in preventing bribery and took steps to improve compliance.
Significance:
Early high-profile case under the Bribery Act.
Reinforced the SFO’s focus on foreign bribery.
Encouraged companies to implement anti-corruption policies.
4. R v. Bilal Hussain (2019)
Background:
An individual convicted for offering bribes to public officials to influence contract awards.
Outcome:
Hussain was sentenced to 3 years imprisonment.
Conviction based on both active bribery and conspiracy.
Significance:
Showed the Act’s reach beyond corporations to individuals.
Highlighted that both giving and receiving bribes are punishable.
Strengthened deterrence against corruption in public procurement.
5. SFO v. Serco Geografix Ltd (2018)
Background:
Serco Geografix was prosecuted for failing to prevent bribery linked to contracts in Africa.
Outcome:
The company admitted liability and agreed to pay fines under a DPA.
Took remedial actions to improve governance.
Significance:
Reinforced importance of corporate compliance.
Demonstrated SFO’s willingness to negotiate DPAs.
Emphasized the international reach of the Bribery Act.
6. SFO v. Unaoil (Ongoing, since 2019)
Background:
Investigation into Unaoil, an oilfield services company, involving allegations of widespread bribery across multiple countries.
Outcome:
Several executives and intermediaries charged and convicted.
Cases ongoing, including trials involving senior figures.
Significance:
Highlights complexity and scale of bribery investigations.
Shows collaboration between UK and international enforcement agencies.
Continues to influence corporate approaches to anti-bribery compliance.
🔹 Key Legal Principles from These Cases
Strict Liability for Corporate Failure: Companies are liable if they fail to prevent bribery, regardless of intent.
Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs): A tool used by the SFO to resolve cases while encouraging corporate reform.
Global Reach: The Act applies to UK companies and individuals worldwide.
Individual Liability: Executives and employees can be prosecuted personally.
Importance of Procedures: Adequate procedures can serve as a defense against the corporate offence.
Focus on Foreign Corrupt Practices: Significant enforcement against bribery of foreign officials.
RELATED Blog
0 comments