Standard Bank Deferred Prosecution Agreement

This proactive approach is commendable. However, in the absence of formal agreements or contracts, the question remains whether authorities in other jurisdictions will still be willing to give in as easily, particularly in larger transactions or in a politically charged case. The standard bank DPA also contains a provision that, in the event that the standard bank transfers its activities to a third party, the agreement contains a provision linking the successor to the standard Bank DPA liabilities. The statement of facts is included in the DPA bank standard in paragraph 2 and Article 3 provides, on the whole, that this presentation of the facts is considered an admission of prosecution in the event of termination of the standard bank DPA. Delayed prosecutions have become one of the preferred methods of enforcing laws against companies, as they give prosecutors more control over operations and procedures within a company to help improve oversight and governance, said Cunningham of George Washington University. In a judgment handed down on 30 November 2015 to Serious Fraud Office/Standard Bank Plc: Deferred Prosecution Agreement (case: U20150854), the Crown Court approved the UK`s first Deferred Prosecution Agreement (“Standard Bank DPA”) under the data protection regulations that came into force in the UNITED Kingdom by Section 45 and 17 Crime of the Courts Act 2013. The full verdict that can be found here provides an invaluable insight into the approach of the SFO and the court data protection authorities and the degree of cooperation required by companies to ensure that an investigation is resolved by a DPA. The standard DPA bank, between the Serious Fraud Office and Standard Bank PLC (now icBC Standard Bank PLC), is here. www.wsj.com/articles/u-k-serious-fraud-office-concludes-its-first-deferred-prosecution-agreement-in-standard-bank-case-1543617627 On 30 November 2015, Lord Justice Leveson (as a Crown Court judge) approved the UK`s first prosecution agreement (DPA) between the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and Standard Bank for a s7 charge under the Bribery Act 2010 (bribery Act 2010). Standard Bank agreed to pay $16.8 million in penalties to the British government and an additional $7 million in compensation to the Tanzanian government and to waive, as part of its agreement with the Agency, the $8.4 million in costs of the contract. The bank also agreed to review and modify its internal compliance program and pay the agency`s fees while cooperating with the investigation, according to the SFO.

In the opinion of the Standard Bank, Lord Justice Brian Leveson pointed to specific measures taken by the bank that ultimately helped the court approve the Dpa. On the one hand, Standard Bank immediately came forward to the authorities and “took a really proactive approach to this issue,” Leveson said. “In this case, the revelation was made in the days following the suspicions that the bank had been informed of and before their lawyers had opened their own (let alone completed) investigation.” The bank worked with an independent expert from PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP to verify its internal anti-corruption and corruption controls.