BEGIN:VCALENDAR
PRODID:-//Session events Calendar//IBA//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
VERSION:2.0
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20260420T073057Z
DTSTART:20171010T143000Z
DTEND:20171010T154500Z
SUMMARY:Justice for sale? DPAs\, NPAs and other negotiated settlements
DESCRIPTION:Not every white collar or regulatory breach can be investigat
 ed\, let alone prosecuted. Companies cannot be imprisoned and\, when fin
 ed\, it is arguably the shareholder\, rather than the individual wrongdo
 er\, who pays for the breach. Prosecutors have to strike a balance betwe
 en managing their limited resources\, while at the same time ensuring th
 ey produce outcomes with sufficient deterrent effect to influence boardr
 oom behaviour. The US and UK authorities have used deferred prosecution 
 agreements (DPAs) and\, in the US\, non-prosecution agreements (NPAs) to
  address this issue\, although their approach to DPAs is not uniform. Ot
 her jurisdictions have used administrative sanctions processes to produc
 e speedy public settlements involving significant penalties but avoiding
  criminal sanctions. Regulators in different jurisdictions are also now 
 working together to negotiate agreed cross-border settlements\, such as 
 global DPAs.\n\nThis session will examine the different devices deployed
  and ask:\n\n• Should there be DPAs\, NPAs and/or administrative sanctio
 ns? For companies and individuals?\n• What are the key differences betwe
 en the US and UK approach to DPAs?\n• Which criminal and/or regulatory c
 ases are suitable for negotiated settlements and which are not?\n• How d
 o you get the best deal for your client?\n• What level of cooperation is
  too much cooperation?\n• How do you ensure a negotiated settlement in o
 ne jurisdiction does not prejudice your client in another?
LOCATION:Room C3.5\, Convention Centre\, Level 3
UID:a2db8cec-df60-4e61-9d1c-bb8ecbc3b3d6
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR