Adequate Procedures, Corporate hospitality - Written by on Thursday, September 16, 2010 0:05 - 0 Comments

Go go dancers a no go-go

Print Friendly

One of our favourite blogs (FCPA Professor) is covering the World Bribery & Corruption Compliance forum.

We’re pleased to see Dominic Grieve QC, MP, the UK Attorney General and Robert Amaee, Head of Anti Corruption, Proceeds of Crime & International Assistance, SFO are there and both reading from the book of common sense.

More pleasing was more helpful assurance on corporate hospitality under the new UK Bribery Act coming into force in April next year clarifying the position in relation to corporate hospitality and government officials.

There has been some discussion that in hospitality extended to public officials would be considered a bribe by the UK enforcement authorities under Bribery Act.

This is because while under the Bribery Act there must be an intention to influence the official unlike commercial bribery offence there is no requirement for “improper performance” of a job.

What then, if a business needs to show a delegation from a government an example of a previous construction project and needs to fly them to do so, flys them economy and puts them up in a modest hotel. We have always considered that in such a case it would be non-sensical to prosecute. No element could be said to be lavish and the visit is necessary.

Its reported that Attorney General spent some time talking about corporate hospitality. He confirmed that corporate hospitality is “not illegal” and it’s “not intended to clamp down” on reasonable corporate hospitality. He warned that lavish hospitality would not be tolerated. So far, so good but nothing we hadn’t already heard.

However, it’s reported that the Attorney General also spoke about a recent article in the Financial Times “Mining and Oil Groups Dig In For Bribery Act” (our favourite newspaper). The story notes concerns over the example of a company flying a local mayor to a remote region of the country to view the company’s production facilities and paying for food and accomodation.

The Attorney General drew a distinction. He contrasted the Chilean Mayor example with a company paying for a foreign public official to stay at the Ritz in Paris with “go-go girls” on tap. This would clearly cross over the line. It is unacceptable and would be considered a bribe. A no go-go if you like.

However, its reported that the Attorney General said he “found it difficult” how any “sensible person” could think that flying the mayor to view the production facility was bribery. We agree. And we’re pleased to hear it.

Share Button


Comments are closed.

Brought to you by...

Barry Vitou &
Richard Kovalevsky Q.C.

The views expressed on this website are those of Barry Vitou & Richard Kovalevsky QC and/or our guest authors from time to time. Please see our terms of use

in association with...

Our Tweets

Tuesday, October 3, 2017 9:26

Opinion: Bertling convictions another notch on SFO bedpost-sentencing will provide a sibling to guilty plea disposal https://t.co/ZMjnhIzaah

Friday, August 11, 2017 20:40

Former DoJ chief Sally Yates on being fired by Trump https://t.co/lmCjHKXJBj via @FT

Sunday, June 11, 2017 8:18

Opinion: As debate shifts from future of SFO to future of Theresa May we say: At last, fund the SFO properly. https://t.co/PwuCqHPkTq

Friday, June 9, 2017 12:21

SFO cat uses up another life! SFO set to stay after Theresa May's authority is seriously undermined.

Tuesday, May 23, 2017 11:44

Opinion: Conservatives must answer two basic questions about the plan to merge the SFO into the NCA https://t.co/OREkjacH2H