SFO secures DPAs worth $3.4M with two unnamed companies
By 
Neil Hodge2021-07-20T17:18:00
The Serious Fraud Office announced deferred prosecution agreements worth £2.5 million (U.S. $3.4 million) with two unidentified U.K.-based companies for bribery offenses.
THIS IS MEMBERS-ONLY CONTENT
You are not logged in and do not have access to members-only content.
If you are already a registered user or a member, SIGN IN now.
Related articles
-
Article10 years of U.K. Bribery Act: Compliance enough to define law’s success?
The U.K. Bribery Act marked its 10th anniversary this month, but views are mixed about how the legislation and its enforcement have fared in the decade since it came into force.
-
ArticleSFO guidance could help companies combat U.K. Bribery Act charges
New internal guidance from the U.K. Serious Fraud Office outlines what the regulator considers in determining if a company’s compliance procedures are adequate enough to defend against U.K. Bribery Act charges or qualify for a deferred prosecution agreement.
-
ArticleA critical review of the SFO’s DPA process
Companies considering entering a deferred prosecution agreement with the U.K. Serious Fraud Office might instead want to take their chances with a trial following the outcomes of a trio of recent high-profile corruption cases.
More from Regulatory Enforcement
-
ArticleFrench investigators target anticompetitive practices in largest accounting firms
Major accountancy firms in France are under investigation for anti-competitive practices. The French competition watchdog embarked on a series of “unannounced inspections” and removed documents relating to audit and reporting on Jan. 13.
-
ArticleEU investigation into Grok may expose problems with DSA rather than compliance failings
The European Commission has launched a formal investigation against Elon Musk’s X under the Digital Services Act over fears that its AI tool Grok may be producing and disseminating illegal material.
-
ArticleFormer ADM execs inflated operating profits, SEC alleges
Three former executives at Archer-Daniels-Midland intentionally misled investors by inflating the performance of the company’s Nutrition unit, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has alleged.