- Barclays Qatar fraud case (Part III)—challenging corporate officers’ individual liability
- In the proceedings against the individuals, how did the courts deal with the issue of principal or direct liability?
- How did the courts deal with the issue of innocent agency?
- How did the courts deal with the issue of secondary liability and participation?
Corporate Crime analysis: In the final part of a three-part series of articles considering the Serious Fraud Office’s (SFO’s) failed investigation and prosecution of Barclays and others, in connection with how the bank had raised money during the 2008 banking crisis, barrister Shiv Haria-Shah and solicitors Rubi Palmieri and Ed Pearson, all of Fulcrum Chambers, consider the courts' decisions in the proceedings against the individuals, in particular, with regard to direct liability, innocent agency and participation.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial