Corruption meaning

Anti-bribery and corruption Checklist This anti-bribery and corruption Checklist helps you assess whether your systems meet the Bribery Act 2010 (BA 2010) and the government’s guidance on bribery and corruption. Read it together with these subtopics: Anti-bribery and corruption—regulatory regime Anti-bribery and corruption—Identifying & assessing risks Anti-bribery and corruption—policy and procedures, or for law firms, Anti-bribery and corruption—policy and procedures—law firms Anti-bribery and corruption—gifts and hospitality Anti-bribery and corruption—agents and intermediaries Anti-bribery and corruption—joint ventures and acquisitions Anti-bribery and corruption—charitable and political donations Anti-bribery and corruption—staff training & awareness, or for law firms, Anti-bribery and corruption—staff training and awareness—law firms Anti-bribery and corruption—monitoring and review This Checklist signposts relevant Precedents you can use or tailor to satisfy these requirements and recommendations. It includes a box to indicate whether each item has been completed and a section to add comments or record action points...

STOP PRESS This Practice Note is being revised to incorporate the new guidance from the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) - Self report policy: guidance to businesses reporting economic crime offences - under which businesses may now self‑report a range of economic crime offences. There are significant differences between the self‑reporting initiative operated by COPFS in Scotland and the deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) regime running in the rest of the UK. Any business that discovers corruption within the organisation should ensure it understands these distinctions before deciding which authority to contact. This Checklist sets out the main differences between the Scottish self‑reporting initiative and the DPA regime applied elsewhere in the UK. Introduction to the two regimes Scottish self-reporting initiative The Scottish self‑reporting initiative was launched on 1 July 2011 when the Bribery Act 2010 (BA 2010), a UK‑wide statute, took effect. The Scottish initiative applies solely to offences under BA 2010 or analogous bribery offences that applied before BA 2010 commenced. Under the...

Indicators of corruption-checklist Organisations and their staff should remain vigilant for signs of corruption. This checklist outlines indicators that would usually justify an escalated investigation. For further information on internal investigations, see: Internal investigation on suspicion of failure to prevent bribery-checklist. During contract negotiations, or when finalising a previous contract, assess whether any payment arrangements seem unusual, including: pressures to amend agreed terms, such as demands for urgent and/or early payments a request for cash payment money routed through a third country or to a shell company in another country an abnormally high commission paid to a particular agency, see Practice Note: How to identify when a commission might become a bribe instructions to split a payment between two accounts for the same agent, notably where the accounts are in different countries, see Practice Note: Agents and other intermediaries the settlement of high-value expenses (for example, expensive restaurant bills), or non-business expenses (such as school) ...

Does the business maintain a due diligence policy that covers every party to a commercial relationship, including the company’s supply chain, agents, joint ventures, intermediaries, or any comparable or similar arrangement? Has this policy been rolled out and properly enforced in all of the markets in which the company trades and operates? See Precedent: Anti‑bribery and corruption policy The company must know who it is engaging with to carry out an effective risk assessment. It should use a due diligence information form that the contracting party completes and signs, so the due diligence information supplied can be reviewed and assessed by the company...

Flowchart This flowchart offers a concise overview of the tax considerations that could prompt a company to select a specific route to demerger. The terms and expressions used in the flowchart are set out in the Practice Notes on demergers, as follows: Demergers—an introduction to the tax issues Statutory demergers Capital reduction demergers Liquidation demergers For a PDF version, please click below...

Is the risk assessment overseen at the highest level in the company? To demonstrate commitment from the top to anti-bribery controls, a company officer or a member of the Board should be designated to supervise the anti-bribery and risk assessment process. See Practice Note: Anti-bribery and corruption policy. Consider: Do senior management or the Board hold ultimate responsibility for the risk assessment process? Have duties for anti-bribery and corruption been delegated; if so, to whom and on what basis? How is this recorded? Has the company allocated bribery risk assessment to employees (for example, a compliance officer) who report directly to the Board? How has the company ensured the risk assessment is fit for purpose and able to withstand scrutiny?...

Nick Ephgrave Nick Ephgrave acknowledged it was no secret that the SFO has witnessed a slight drop-off in the number of companies approaching the specialist anti-corruption body with suspected fraud and bribery within their organisation. To address this, the SFO intends to invest further in covert intelligence-gathering so it can better understand what is happening in corporate settings and, in turn, either pursue targets or encourage them to come forward, he told Law360 and reporters from other news outlets. Ephgrave said he wants to be more in control of the referrals received by an agency that largely depends on businesses volunteering information, with the aim of invigorating and provoking self-reporting by companies. He added that he is really seeking to drive up the number of corporates the SFO deals with, whether through self-reporting supported by revised corporate guidance, via intelligence from whistleblowers, or by relying on good old-fashioned covert policing techniques such as surveillance, the deployment of undercover officers, and the use of informants...

In this issue A review of key cases in 2025 Decision to prosecute and alternatives to prosecution Criminal procedure and evidence Proceeds of crime Bribery, corruption, sanctions and export controls Environmental offences Financial services and pensions offences Health and safety and corporate manslaughter offences Local authority prosecutions Money laundering Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information A review of key cases in 2025 Headline corporate crime matters in 2025 included the UK Supreme Court overturning the convictions of two traders jailed for rate manipulation; the anti-fraud agency deploying a seldom‑used legal power to recover criminal cash; and the first conviction for sanctions breaches. See News Analysis: The biggest financial crime cases of 2025. Decision to prosecute and alternatives to prosecution SFO compliance guide highlights early remediation is key On 26 November 2025, the Serious Fraud Office (SFO)...

In this issue: Decision to prosecute and alternatives to prosecution Criminal procedure and evidence Proceeds of crime Appeals and judicial review Sentencing Bribery, corruption, sanctions and export controls Cybercrime and data protection offences Fraud, forgery, tax and theft offences Health and safety and corporate manslaughter offences Other corporate crime updates LexTalk®Corporate Crime: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Decision to prosecute and alternatives to prosecution Deferred Prosecution Agreements—an ‘expiry date’ or a ‘best before’? (Guralp Systems Ltd v Serious Fraud Office) The statutory framework for Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs) requires an expiry date within every DPA, mandates that any breach application is made while the DPA remains in force, and provides that where a DPA lasts until its expiry, the proceedings are to be discontinued. In this case, the DPA’s terms specified effectiveness for...

ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note is not being maintained. Today, most global businesses work with third parties, tapping into vital capabilities that help them operate across markets. Yet those relationships can also carry significant corruption exposure, potentially resulting in breaches of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). With the right diligence, tailored contractual terms, targeted training, and robust oversight, organisations can manage FCPA risk while still benefiting from third-party contributions to their operations. The FCPA bars corrupt payments made through intermediaries when a company is ‘knowing’ that some or all of the money will be passed to a foreign government official. It is not necessary to have actual knowledge of a third party’s conduct; wilful blindness can be enough to attribute knowledge. In practice, businesses cannot look the other way or disregard indications of possible bribery by those they engage. Agents, distributors, consultants, contractors, and subcontractors Service-providers, suppliers, and other non-intermediary third parties Effective third-party engagement should include anti-corruption due diligence,...

ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note offers a practical guide to running and resisting investigations and prosecutions under the UK’s former corruption framework that applied before the Bribery Act 2010 (BA 2010) commenced (the pre‑BA 2010 regime). It addresses: how to frame charges for common law bribery (ie under the relevant statutes), including charge selection for conduct straddling both regimes case law defining a public body the need for a corrupt intent the presumption of corruption and associated human rights ramifications the requirements of secrecy and corruption, and what companies can do to minimise historic exposure to prosecution This Practice Note also considers: the offence of bribery at common law the Public Bodies Corrupt Practices Act 1889 (PBCPA 1889) the Prevention of Corruption Act 1906 (PCA 1906), and the Prevention of Corruption Act 1916 (PCA 1916) For details on the operative legal provisions, ongoing liability, territorial reach, and penalties and sentencing...

The Bribery Act 2010 (BA 2010) Enacted to secure the UK’s adherence to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions, the Bribery Act 2010 (BA 2010) delivers an effective framework to address corruption across public and private spheres, updating the UK’s anti-corruption regime and supplanting Prevention of Corruption Act 1906 and Prevention of Corruption Act 1916. BA 2010 carries significant consequences for any company incorporated in, or trading from, the UK. Its global reach covers bribery undertaken by a business, or by third parties acting for it, regardless of where in the world the conduct occurs...

We conduct our business [ es ] with integrity. We must all work together to ensure our business [ es ] remain [ s ] free from bribery and corruption. This FAQ, which is central to that aim, sets out how we can achieve our business objectives in a way that aligns with our commitment to combating bribery and corruption. 1 Do the same rules and regulations relating to gifts and hospitality apply in every country? No. Rules and regulations vary from country to country, and in the United States the rules for the federal government are different from those for individual states, and they also differ among the various states. [ Insert organisation’s name ] specifies the appropriate limits for gifts and hospitality in the countries where it operates in our [ international permissible gifts/hospitality limits table ]. 2 A vendor gave me a seasonal gift. May I accept it?...

This agreement is dated [ insert day and month ] 20[ insert year ] Parties [ Insert name of company in which the shares are held ], incorporated in England and Wales with company number [ insert company number ] and having its registered office at [ insert address ] (the Company), [ Insert name of company in which the shares are held ], incorporated in England and Wales with company number [ insert company number ] and having its registered office at [ insert address ] (Newco 2), [ Insert name of company in which the shares are held ], incorporated in England and Wales with company number [ insert company number ] and having its registered office at [ insert address ] (Newco 3), The various persons named and addressed in Schedule 1 (together, the Managers), and The various persons named and addressed in Schedule 3 and any other such person as defined in clause 1.4 (the Investors) ...

Stop press: The Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 (Commencement No 6 and Transitional and Saving Provisions) Regulations 2026, SI 2026/82 bring the remaining elements of the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 (DUAA 2025) into operation. Measures addressing subject access requests, legitimate interests, purpose limitation, automated decision-making, international transfers and enforcement apply from 5 February 2026, while the provisions on penalty notices and complaints apply from 19 June 2026. For further details, see Practice Note: Data (Use and Access) Act 2025—employment implications. This Precedent will be revised shortly to reflect these updates. This Agreement is entered into on [ insert date ] Parties [ Name of Company ], a company incorporated in England and Wales with registered number [ insert company number ] whose registered office is at [ insert address ] (the Company); and [ Name of consultant ], of [ insert address ] (‘ you ’). Background (A) You operate in the business of [ insert description...

Please note, this Q&A deals exclusively with UK bribery legislation. Payment of commissions We refer you to Practice Note: How to identify when a commission might become a bribe, which explains that any commission involves providing a financial advantage, albeit it will not invariably amount to a bribe. The Bribery Act 2010 (BA 2010) adopts a wide view of what can constitute a bribe. It is characterised as a 'financial or other advantage' offered or received in a business setting, which amounts to, or induces, the improper performance of a relevant function or activity...

Section 7 of the Bribery Act 2010 (BA 2010) provides: (1) A relevant commercial organisation (“C”) is guilty of an offence under this section if a person (“A”) associated with C offers a bribe to another person with the intention of: (a) securing or retaining business for C; or (b) securing or retaining an advantage in the conduct of C’s business. (2) However, it is a defence for C to prove that it had in place adequate procedures devised to prevent persons associated with C from carrying out such conduct. BA 2010, s 8 defines an associated person: (1) For the purposes of section 7, a person (“A”) is associated with C if (disregarding any bribe under consideration) A is a person who performs services for or on behalf of C. (2) The capacity in which A performs services for or on behalf of C does not matter. (3) Accordingly A may (for example) be C’s...