1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |The UK Bribery Act and Foreign Corrupt Practices Act: What US Companies Need to Know

The UK Bribery Act and Foreign Corrupt Practices Act: What US Companies Need to Know

Event | 09.21.11, 12:00 AM UTC - 12:00 AM UTC

Address

Crowell & Moring

The recent implementation of the UK Bribery Act, and the increased enforcement of the FCPA, is of considerable significance for all US companies (and for executives and employees of those companies) doing any business abroad. Crowell & Moring White Collar and Regulatory Enforcement partners Gerallt Owen, a leading UK practitioner, and Tom Hanusik, a DC-based based trial lawyer and former Department of Justice fraud prosecutor, will present a breakfast briefing on the UK Bribery Act and the tougher enforcement of the FCPA.


The Bribery Act 2010, which came into force this past July, will have far-reaching implications for companies and individuals. The Bribery Bill does not mirror the provisions of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) but is actually considerably more robust and creates a platform for what could be the toughest enforcement regime in any jurisdiction. Any UK presence (subsidiary, office or operations), subjects US and foreign companies to jurisdiction under the terms of the Bribery Act. The Bribery Act applies to both UK companies and foreign companies with operations in the UK, even if offenses take place in a third country and are unrelated to UK operations. Thus, companies that do business in the UK must start thinking immediately about whether their current policies, systems, controls and training programs are compliant with the UK anti-bribery law. And increased FCPA enforcement suggests that companies reexamine their policies and practices to ensure that are in a position to avoid conduct that creates liability under the FCPA. Anticorruption compliance is important to all organizations and our breakfast briefing will help companies understand the risks of non-compliance with both the Bribery Act and the FCPA.


For more information, please visit these areas: White Collar and Regulatory Enforcement

Insights

Event | 02.20.25

Has the Buss Stopped? Recoupment Today

Has the Buss Stopped? Recoupment Today: In 1997, the California Supreme Court decided Buss v. Superior Court. In Buss, the court concluded that a liability insurer that defended a mixed action could seek reimbursement from the insured for the defense costs associated with the claims that were not even potentially covered. Since then, numerous courts have held that insurers are entitled to recoup their defense costs associated with uncovered claims or causes of action. On the other hand, a significant number of courts have rejected insurers’ right to recoupment, at least in the absence of a policy provision granting the insurer that right. Some commentators have even suggested that the current judicial trend might be away from permitting insurers to recoup their defense costs. Is that correct? Has the Buss stopped? This panel of coverage experts will analyze insurers’ claimed right to recoupment today, and offer their perspectives on what the law on recoupment should perhaps be and might be in the future.