1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |UK Bribery Act - UK Government succumbs to pressure and delays implementation of the Act

UK Bribery Act - UK Government succumbs to pressure and delays implementation of the Act

Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.01.11

On January 31 2011, the UK Justice Minister, Ken Clarke, announced that the Bribery Act ("the Act"), which had been due to come into force in April 2011, will be delayed for at least three months. This was confirmation of what many believed would happen after the Government announced, in early January 2011, that there was to be a review of the legislation following growing concerns from UK businesses and trade organisations that the wording of the Act is ambiguous and that it lacks clarity.

The Ministry of Justice has confirmed that the delay will give the Government time to conduct a thorough review and to issue "practical" and "comprehensive" guidance to companies about what measures need to be put in place prior to the Act coming in to force. There has been much debate in the UK (and abroad) as to how specific this guidance should be –particularly given the Act introduces the new corporate offence of failing to prevent bribery, where a violation is uncovered.

Many had also expressed concern about the lack of any real lead in time between the Government's guidance being issued and the Act coming in to force. The Ministry of Justice has, to a degree, recognised this and said yesterday that there would be at least a three month gap between the guidance being issued and the Act coming in to force.

The delay has been criticised by Transparency International and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD); with the OECD yesterday threatened to put the UK on an export blacklist if the Government continues to delay the implementation of the Act.
Save for any further delays, the Act is now unlikely to come in to force until June/July, at the earliest. Companies with operations in the UK have therefore been given an extra few months to review their Anti-Bribery Polices and Procedures to ensure compliance with the new law.

Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.12.26

DOJ Guidance Backs Away From Disparate Impact Liability

On June 9, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a formal opinion concluding that the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission’s (EEOC) existing interpretations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) disparate-impact liability, including the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP), are unconstitutional. According to the opinion, EEOC’s prior interpretations contemplate liability based on disproportionately adverse effects alone, without regard to an employer’s likely intent, rather than treating disparate impact as an evidentiary mechanism to “smoke out” intentional discrimination. DOJ found that this approach functions as a “qualified racial-proportionality mandate” that places “a racial thumb on the scales, often requiring employers to evaluate the racial outcomes of their policies, and to make decisions based on (because of) those racial outcomes.” The opinion fulfills one mandate of Executive Order 14281, which rejected disparate-impact liability insofar as it “creates a near insurmountable presumption that unlawful discrimination exists wherever there are any differences in outcomes among different [demographic groups].”...

View All Insights