header-logo header-logo

22 May 2019
Issue: 7841 / Categories: Legal News , Fraud , Criminal , Profession
printer mail-detail

Principles post-Panama Papers

A set of ‘Panama Papers scandal’ guidelines for lawyers assisting clients with offshore companies has been published.

The ‘Report of the Task Force on the role of lawyers and international commercial structures’, was launched at an event in London this week by the International Bar Association (IBA) and Secretariat of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The task force was established in December 2016, after the Panama Papers scandal, where about 11 million electronic files from the Panama law firm Mossack Fonseca were publicly disclosed. This was followed in 2017 by the Paradise Papers scandal, the public disclosure of more than 13 million documents, many from the Bermuda law firm Appleby and associated service firms.

The task force explored whether lawyer-client confidentiality is being exploited to cover up unethical or illegal acts, and whether lawyers are hiding behind the ‘few bad apples’ excuse without looking at the overall regulatory structure. It also considered the extent to which lawyers are taking responsibility for their role in facilitating arms trafficking, corruption, mass drug addiction and terrorism financed by the transfer of illicit funds.

The report outlines eight principles to support lawyers in detecting, identifying and preventing illegal conduct in commercial transactions. Rather than duplicating existing guides or seeking to prescribe how lawyers should act in certain circumstances, it ‘focuses on high-level issues of principle that should assist governments in policy formulation and in guiding lawyers as to how they should conduct themselves, consistent with a lawyer’s underlying domestic legal and ethical obligations’.

On misuse of confidence and privilege (principle 2), for example, the report states legal professional privilege is fundamental but should not be used to ‘shield wrongdoers’ and lawyers ‘should give due and proper consideration to refraining from acting for a client’ if aware of, or with reasonable grounds to believe, ‘the main purpose of the retainer is to allow the client to be able to rely on the confidential nature of the lawyer–client relationship’. 

Issue: 7841 / Categories: Legal News , Fraud , Criminal , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll