Deferred prosecution agreement Definition

GLOSSARY

Published by a ��˾��ҹ�� Corporate Crime expert

What does Deferred prosecution agreement mean?

An agreement between a prosecutor and an organisation, approved by court, under which the prosecution of the organisation is deferred provided the organisation agrees to comply with the requirements imposed on it. Only available for certain offences in accordance with Schedule 17 to the Crime and Courts Act 2013.

View the related checklists about Deferred prosecution agreement

Offences for which a DPA may be entered into—checklist

Offences for which a DPA may be entered into—checklist A deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) is an agreement between an organisation and a designated prosecutor to enable the latter to defer a prosecution by staying an indictment on specific terms. No proceedings in relation to the matters covered by the DPA may be instituted against the organisation while the DPA remains in force. A DPA therefore allows a company to continue without the threat of a lengthy criminal investigation and a costly prosecution hanging over it. For detailed information on DPAs, see Practice Notes: • Deferred prosecution agreements • DPA process • Terms and content of a DPA • DPAs in practice DPA’s are only available to organisations in respect of the offences specified under the Crime and Courts Act 2013, Sch 17 (CCA 2013). The checklist below, lists the offences for which a DPA may be entered into, including common law and statutory offences. In addition to the offences below, any offence that is ancillary to those listed below,...

Comparison between the Scottish self-reporting regime and Deferred Prosecution Agreements used in the rest of the UK—checklist

Comparison between the Scottish self-reporting regime and Deferred Prosecution Agreements used in the rest of the UK—checklist There are key differences between the self-reporting initiative operated by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Services (COPFS) in Scotland (Scottish self-reporting initiative) and the deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) regime now operating in the rest of the UK (DPA regime). Any business that uncovers corruption within the organisation should make sure it understands the differences between the two regimes before deciding which authority to approach. This Checklist aims to set out the main differences between the Scottish self-reporting initiative and the DPA regime operating in the rest of the UK. Introduction to the two regimes Scottish self-reporting initiative The Scottish self-reporting initiative was introduced on 1 July 2011 when the Bribery Act 2010 (BA 2010), a UK-wide statute, came into force. The Scottish initiative applies solely to offences under BA 2010 or analogous bribery offences which applied before BA 2010 came into force. Under the regime, a self-reporting business can seek...

The relevance and use of previous convictions in criminal proceedings

The relevance and use of previous convictions in criminal proceedings This Practice Note considers spent convictions and rehabilitation periods under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (ROA 1974) as amended by the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022. It also considers the impact of previous convictions on criminal investigations, as evidence in criminal proceedings and in sentencing. What is a spent conviction? If a conviction or caution has become spent, for most purposes, the offender is treated in law as having never committed an offence. This means, for example, people with spent convictions or cautions have the right under ROA 1974 not to volunteer them when applying for most jobs. This will not prevent them from appearing on a criminal records check by the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS check, sometimes known as a CRB check), which some jobs will require. Certain convictions become spent after a specified period of time. The period of time will vary depending on the disposal or sentence imposed. Convictions for some types of...

Internal company fraud investigations

Internal company fraud investigations Preliminary steps Before any action is taken it is important to consider: • what is the event which has created the suspicion of fraud in the company? • what is the financial impact this has had on the company—what is the loss? • when and how did this loss occur? • who is responsible for this loss? • is there any evidence pointing towards the involvement of the person responsible? Taking early steps to identify and protect privileged material Carefully consider which documents may be protected by LPP. See Practice Notes: Legal professional privilege in criminal proceedings, Maintaining privilege during criminal investigations and Claiming LPP in respect of documents subject to a s 2 notice. Where multinational companies are concerned, consider also Practice Note: Issues of privilege in cross-border criminal investigations and International legal privilege and professional secrecy—overview. Indicators of fraud There are types of behaviour which may be indicators of fraud within a company. Where internal fraud is suspected within the company...

Discover our 54 Practice Notes on Deferred prosecution agreement

If a company self-reports a corrupt transaction but withholds details of other incidences of bribery, will the SFO give them the benefit of having self reported?

If a company self-reports a corrupt transaction but withholds details of other incidences of bribery, will the SFO give them the benefit of having self reported? Commercial organisations which have identified involvement in corruption, whether directly or by an associated person, should seek expert advice before contacting the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) with a view to self reporting, both for advice about conducting an internal investigation and in respect of the consequences of so doing. In particular, any outcome which involves criminal proceedings is likely to be open to active judicial intervention. The Bribery Act 2010 (BA 2010) does not impose a specific duty on a Relevant Commercial Organisation (RCO) to report actual or suspected bribery. However, RCOs will, in that event, wish to consider whether they should do so; the designated organisation to report to is the SFO. RCOs should also consider whether particular cases require reporting separately under section 330 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA 2002) or the Money...

Under what provisions and on what basis can the Financial Conduct Authority prosecute offences under the Fraud Act 2006?

Under what provisions and on what basis can the Financial Conduct Authority prosecute offences under the Fraud Act 2006? The Financial Conduct authority (FCA) was established by section 6 of the Financial Services Act 2012 (FSA 2012), which amended section 1 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA 2000) and replaced the Financial Services Authority as a regulator. FSMA 2000, s 401(2) provides that offences under FSMA 2000, or subordinate legislation made under FSMA 2000, or an offence under FSA 2012, Pt 7 (offences relating to financial services) may only be instituted by the ‘appropriate regulator’ or the Secretary of State, or otherwise with the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions. FSMA 2000, s 401(3B) provides that the FCA is the ‘appropriate regulator’ in relation to prosecuting the following offences under that Act (the Prudential Regulation Authority and the Bank of England are the appropriate regulators in relation to other offences under FSMA 2000): • FSMA 2000, s 23(1)—contravention of the general prohibition on...

See the 4 Q&As about Deferred prosecution agreement

US Department of Justice reaches settlement with McKinsey & Company Africa

The US Department of Justice has announced a settlement with McKinsey & Company Africa (Pty) Ltd, requiring the firm to pay over $122m to resolve an investigation into bribery of South African government officials between 2012 and 2016. The company entered into a three-year deferred prosecution agreement, admitting to conspiracy to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The scheme involved bribing officials at state-owned entities Transnet and Eskom to secure lucrative consulting contracts. A former senior partner, Vikas Sagar, has pleaded guilty to a related charge. The resolution, coordinated with South African authorities, reflects a 35% reduction in penalties due to McKinsey Africa's cooperation and remedial measures. This case marks the third coordinated resolution between the US and South Africa in two years, demonstrating the efficacy of the International Corporate Anti-Bribery initiative.

Corporate Crime weekly highlights—28 November 2024

This week's edition of Corporate Crime weekly highlights includes analysis of the promise from OFSI to impose more fines with tougher penalties for sanctions breaches, of an FCA survey that has revealed the rise in non-financial misconduct and of how the new failure to prevent fraud offence expands liability for corporate environmental fraud. Also included is news of the new digital platform launched by the Supreme Court, of OFSI’s advisory on the Oil Price Cap (OPC) regime and of the latest prosecution news from the SFO. All this, and more, in this week’s Corporate Crime highlights.

Read the latest 411 News articles on Deferred prosecution agreement

Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

Case studies

"While we began looking at ��˾��ҹ�� products primarily for cost saving, it quickly became more about customer service, ease of onboarding, ongoing training and breadth of resources available."

Co-Op

Access all documents on Deferred prosecution agreement

GET ACCESS NOW

Top

Trial

��˾��ҹ��

GLOSSARY