Skip to main content

Insight article

December 8, 2022

Protect SMEs from corporate criminal liability

The law treats corporations as separate legal entities, but to what extent can your employees' actions result in your business being found criminally liable?

Earlier this year, the UK Law Commission reviewed corporate criminal liability law. Find out how proposed changes to the legislation could get your company into a pickle!

It is easier to hold smaller companies accountable for wrongdoings than multi-million-dollar companies. However, the bigger a company gets, the harder it is to identify individuals responsible for criminal acts. The review aims to ensure fair treatment between organisations of different shapes and sizes. But will it achieve this?

The general rule for corporate criminal liability is the ‘identification doctrine’. Identification doctrine means that a company will generally only be held liable for the conduct of a person with the status and authority to constitute the company’s “directing mind and will”. In short, those persons with oversight and control of operations. So, for example, the directors of small businesses are likely to have oversight and control over all operations and therefore be the ones identifiable as the directing mind and will. In contrast, in large companies, the decision-making powers are diffused. Because of this, the UK Law Commission’s review is considering reforming the doctrine.

The Commission is also considering whether to introduce a new offence of “failure to prevent” certain criminal acts (e.g., fraud) by an employee or agent. By way of illustration, as things currently stand, a company employee could commit criminal acts to benefit the company. The company could escape liability by arguing that the employee in question is not ‘senior’ enough to be the directing mind and will. In this scenario, the company would benefit from the criminal act in question but escape liability. However, by introducing an offence of failing to prevent, companies will not escape liability unless they can demonstrate that they have established appropriate policies and procedures to prevent such criminal acts from being carried out in the company’s name.

The costs of introducing new procedures, policies, and training to ensure compliance with the Commission’s proposed changes may be high. Small businesses may need help to meet these, especially post-pandemic and especially considering recent economic forecasts. The key for any business is to understand the proposed changes and ensure that appropriate and proportionate measures are taken, considering the business’s sector, size and risk exposure.

Ensure you have the right policies and procedures in place to help protect your SME from corporate criminal liability. Contact corporate lawyer Evangelos Kyveris today.

Note: This article is not legal advice; it provides information of general interest about current legal issues.

Stay in touch

Subscribe to our newsletter

Stay in touch

By completing your details and submitting this form you confirm you are happy for us to send you marketing communications and that you agree to our Website Privacy Policy and Legal Notice and to us using Mailchimp to process your data.


Sending

News/Insight

  • Why is clear contract drafting important?
    How simple contract clauses can protect your business.


    Read more
  • Ensuring equality: A legal guide to responsibilities and compliance
    Understanding equal opportunities in the workplace


    Read more
  • Navigating the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023: What it means for your business
    The Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 (the Act) represents a significant shift in the UK's approach to combating economic crime, improving corporate transparency, and anti-mo


    Read more
  • Blowing kisses, not boundaries
    Tribunal clears air on workplace etiquette.


    Read more
  • Estate planning: How not to make mincemeat of it!
    The High Court has confirmed that a will handwritten on the back of two cardboard food packages is legally binding.


    Read more

What they say...

  • C Smith, March 2025
    “As executor of a will it was a relief for a solicitor to act on my behalf as though no disputes it was still a lengthy and complex process. It was dealt with mostly by Charlotte B. who kept me informed at all times. She explained the process c

  • Marc, March 2025
    “RIAA Barker Gillette were engaged to handle a real estate transaction with unusual circumstances. As a non-UK resident unfamiliar with English conveyancing procedures, I felt completely satisfied with the depth of the information and explanati

  • Leigh, March 2025
    “Instructed Martin on my first property purchase. He was a delight to work with, kept me informed and updated regularly. It was an incredibly smooth and quick process. Couldn’t be happier.”

  • Ms Brownell, March 2025
    “Patrick was amazing from start to finish. He made the process so easy, and explained each step in detail ahead of time so I’d understand what would happen and when. He was incredibly organized and noted every detail, calling out things t

  • Roman Cassini, February 2025
    “Peter Wright – highly recommended solicitor, helped us though a complicated flat sale with consummate professionalism.”

Read more
Send this to a friend