Suchergebnisse

A corporate leniency program provides relief from government penalties to the first member of a cartel to come forward and cooperate with the authorities. This study explores the incentives to apply for leniency when each cartel member has private information as to the likelihood that the competition authority will be able to convict them without a cooperating firm. A firm may apply for leniency because it fears being convicted or because it fears another firm will apply. Policies by the competition authority to magnify concerns about pre-emption - and thereby induce greater use of the leniency program - are explored.

AbstractThis article is set against the backdrop of the inability of Canadian courts to hear civil cases brought by victims of the operations of Canadian mining corporations in developing countries where accountability mechanisms are weak. The article examines the legal framework for extraterritorial criminal prosecution in Canada with a view to seeing how corporate criminal prosecution could fill the accountability gap and contribute to the promotion of the accountability of Canadian mining corporations involved in human and environmental rights abuses in developing countries. The article argues that extraterritorial criminal prosecution holds prospects for success in Canada, if only the Canadian government is willing to utilize it. The real and substantial link test, the Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes Act, and several sections of the Criminal Code provide sufficient jurisdictional bases for such prosecution. The amendments to the doctrine of corporate criminal liability that were made in Canada in 2003 bolster the criminal jurisdictional strength of Canadian courts. Lastly, there are no compelling international comity concerns to discourage the Canadian government from utilizing the criminal justice process to contribute to the global fight against corporate impunity in human and environmental rights abuses. This article seeks to contribute to the knowledge of the powers at the disposal of the Canadian government to do so.

AbstractIn April 2008, the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 (CMCHAct) came into force in the UK. Since then, the Act has failed to live up to expectations, resulting in only 26 convictions in the first decade of its existence, despite thousands of work‐related fatalities during this time. This article critically analyses these CMCHAct prosecutions in order to chronicle the problems of the law in action and to demonstrate how the Act serves to downplay the seriousness of corporate killing. In so doing, we approach law as an 'active discourse' that is mutually constitutive of the broader social formation, so that it both creates, but is also a product of, the capitalist social order. Thus we explore the extent to which the CMCHAct ultimately privileges dominant beliefs that corporate killing is not 'true' crime and that corporate capitalism is an inherent good that must be defended, not disrupted.