header-logo header-logo

03 June 2010 / David Corker
Issue: 7420 / Categories: Opinion , Regulatory
printer mail-detail

Time for a serious (SFO) rethink

The importance of Thomas LJ’s sentencing remarks delivered in the Innospec case on 18 March in relation to the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) in particular and corporate criminality in general cannot be underestimated

Innospec represents a profound rejection of SFO corruption policy, says David Corker

The importance of Thomas LJ’s sentencing remarks delivered in the Innospec case on 18 March in relation to the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) in particular and corporate criminality in general cannot be underestimated (Regina v Innospec Limited [2010] EW Misc 7 (EWCC)). It was not judicial hyperbole when the judge described the issues he wished to address as raising issues of “constitutional principle” and the rule of law.

It is ironic that this judgment was by a judge sitting in the Crown Court. Normally such first instance judgments carry little weight and are rarely reported. That an appellate judge who is also the deputy head of criminal justice decided to sit in the Crown Court strongly suggests that it was intended that his sentencing remarks should be widely broadcast and be seen as conveying

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll