header-logo header-logo

01 September 2025
Issue: 8129 / Categories: Legal News , Fraud , Commercial , Risk management , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Failure to prevent fraud offence rolls out

Large companies and organisations risk hefty fines if their compliance procedures are not up to scratch, as of this week

The offence of failure to prevent fraud under the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 comes into force on 1 September. It occurs where ‘persons associated’ commit a fraud offence ‘with the intention of benefiting the organisation or a person to whom the organisation provides services’.

Joint guidance issued in August by the Serious Fraud Office and Crown Prosecution Service warned that corporate entities may be criminally liable ‘irrespective of whether they intended or were aware of’ the conduct.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll