Not every white collar or regulatory breach can be investigated, let alone prosecuted. Companies cannot be imprisoned and, when fined, it is arguably the shareholder, rather than the individual wrongdoer, who pays for the breach. Prosecutors have to strike a balance between managing their limited resources, while at the same time ensuring they produce outcomes with sufficient deterrent effect to influence boardroom 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. Other jurisdictions have used administrative sanctions processes to produce 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. This session will examine the different devices deployed and ask: • Should there be DPAs, NPAs and/or administrative sanctions? For companies and individuals? • What are the key differences between the US and UK approach to DPAs? • Which criminal and/or regulatory cases are suitable for negotiated settlements and which are not? • How do you get the best deal for your client? • What level of cooperation is too much cooperation? • How do you ensure a negotiated settlement in one jurisdiction does not prejudice your client in another?