Tag Archives: Aisling Cowell

ICO Dawn Raids: How to respond and what you can do to prepare – An FAQ

by Robert Maddox and Aisling Cowell

Left to Right: Robert Maddox and Aisling Cowell (photos courtesy of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP)

In the UK, unannounced inspections of businesses’ premises, or “dawn raids”, are most often associated with authorities such as the Serious Fraud Office, National Crime Agency, Competition and Markets Authority and Metropolitan Police. However, data controllers and processers should be aware that the UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) can also carry out dawn raids as part of investigations into compliance with data protection laws.

Such inspections can be stressful and complex for businesses to respond to, with a risk of criminal liability for failing to cooperate properly.

Here, we examine the ICO’s powers to conduct dawn raids, how those powers have been exercised in the past, and outline the steps which businesses should consider taking to prepare effectively for – and appropriately respond to – dawn raids.

Continue reading →

A Game-Changer for UK Corporate Crime Enforcement? Major Expansion of Corporate Criminal Liability Proposed

by Karolos Seeger, Konstantin Bureiko, Aisling Cowell, and Andrew Lee

Photos of the authors

From left to right: Karolos Seeger, Konstantin Bureiko, Aisling Cowell, and Andrew Lee (Photos courtesy of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP)

Recently, the UK government announced a groundbreaking proposal to reform the identification doctrine—the principle used to hold a company liable for criminal offences committed by those who represent its “directing mind and will”.[1]

For a wide range of offences, including bribery, money laundering, sanctions, fraud and false accounting offences, the actions of a “senior manager… acting within the actual or apparent scope of their authority” will be attributable to his or her employer. The draft wording was added to the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill, which, as part of the government’s focus on overhauling UK economic crime legislation, already includes a new failure to prevent fraud corporate offence.[2]

Continue reading →

UK Introduces New ‘Failure to Prevent Fraud’ Corporate Offence

by Karolos Seeger, Aisling Cowell, and Andrew Lee

Photos of the authors

From left to right: Karolos Seeger, Aisling Cowell, and Andrew Lee (Photos courtesy of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP)

Following confirmation by the UK Government earlier this year that it intended to create a new ‘failure to prevent’ corporate criminal offence, it has now published the much-anticipated draft wording of a failure to prevent fraud offence. This will form part of the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill (the “ECCT Bill”), which is currently being debated by the House of Lords. Once enacted, the ECCT Bill will be the most important law tackling economic crime since the Bribery Act 2010.[1] It is also the culmination of a long debate about the reform of corporate criminal liability, including a review by the Law Commission completed last year.[2]

Continue reading →

The SFO Publishes Its Internal Guidance on Deferred Prosecution Agreements

by Karolos Seeger, Robin Lööf, and Aisling Cowell

On October 23, 2020, the United Kingdom’s Serious Fraud Office (the “SFO”) published the chapter on deferred prosecution agreements (“DPAs”) from its Operational Handbook, including how it “engages with companies where a DPA is a prospective outcome”.[1] The SFO has made clear that this guidance is for internal use only and was published “in the interests of transparency”; it is not authoritative. Although the guidance does not contain new information or changes from existing DPA practice, it is useful in setting out the SFO’s consolidated approach in respect of DPAs. It does not supersede or replace previous guidance and should be considered alongside the legislation covering entry into a DPA (Schedule 17 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013) and the DPA Code, which is authoritative, as well as previous guidance, including the Corporate Co-operation Guidance.

So far, the SFO has concluded eight DPAs, with a ninth DPA awaiting approval by the court on 30 October 2020.

Continue reading →

UK Law Commission Recommends Reforms to Money Laundering Suspicious Activity Reports

by Karolos Seeger, Aisling Cowell, Andrew Lee, and Natasha McCarthy

The Law Commission has published an extensive report examining the UK’s current Suspicious Activity Report (“SAR”) regime for notifying suspected money laundering to the National Crime Agency (“NCA”) and outlining 19 recommendations for reform.[1] These include both legislative and non-legislative mechanisms designed to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the consent regime. This report follows a July 2018 consultation paper, which was discussed in a previous client update.[2] Interestingly, the Law Commission reviewed a sample of hundreds of SARs to help it analyse the potential impact of the various proposals and lend support to its final recommendations.

In short, the existing SAR regime will be largely retained, with the recommendations having limited practical effect, especially for organisations outside the regulated sector. We summarise below the key recommendations and consider their likely impact. Continue reading →