"The way UUÂãÁÄÖ±²¥ dealt with us was receptive and not pushy. They took the time to get to know us and what we needed as a business."
Irwin Mitchell
Access all documents on Conspiracy
An agreement between two or more persons to commit an offence, or which necessarily involves committing an offence, or which falls within the ambit of “conspiracy to defraud†or “conspiracy to corrupt public morals/outrage public decencyâ€.
The offence of common law conspiracy is committed where two or more persons agree: (i) to defraud, whether or not the fraud amounts to a crime or even a tort; (ii) to do an act which tends to corrupt public morals or outrage public decency, whether or not this amounts to a crime, but only where the agreement would not amount to or involve the commission of an offence if carried out by a single person otherwise than in pursuance of an agreement (in which case it can be charged a statutory conspiracy).
The offence of statutory conspiracy is committed where two or more persons agree to pursue a course of conduct which, if carried out in accordance with their intentions, will necessarily amount to or involve the commission of any offence(s) by one or more of the conspirators, or would do so but for the existence of facts which
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.
For our full legal glossary and more legal research sources, register for a free Lexis+ trial
Offences for which a DPA may be entered into—checklist A deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) is an agreement between an organisation and a designated prosecutor to enable the latter to defer a prosecution by staying an indictment on specific terms. No proceedings in relation to the matters covered by the DPA may be instituted against the organisation while the DPA remains in force. A DPA therefore allows a company to continue without the threat of a lengthy criminal investigation and a costly prosecution hanging over it. For detailed information on DPAs, see Practice Notes: • Deferred prosecution agreements • DPA process • Terms and content of a DPA • DPAs in practice DPA’s are only available to organisations in respect of the offences specified under the Crime and Courts Act 2013, Sch 17 (CCA 2013). The checklist below, lists the offences for which a DPA may be entered into, including common law and statutory offences. In addition to the offences below, any offence that is ancillary to those listed below,...
Sentencing Guidelines for Corporate offenders—Fraud or VAT offences checklist This Checklist summarises the Sentencing Council’s guidelines for sentencing corporate offences of fraud under the Fraud Act 2006 (FrA 2006), Theft Act 1968 (TA 1968), Value Added Tax Act 1994 (VATA 1994) and Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 (CEMA 1979) in the Crown Court and magistrates’ court. The Fraud Guidelines for corporate offenders can be accessed here: • Magistrates’ Court Sentencing Guideline—Corporate offenders: fraud, bribery and money laundering—for use in cases involving corporates being sentenced in the magistrates’ court • Crown Court Sentencing Guideline—Corporate offenders: fraud, bribery and money laundering—for use in cases involving corporates being sentenced in the Crown Court The Sentencing Council also publishes a number of overarching guidelines, which should be considered in respect of all sentencing exercises. This includes: • Totality guideline (Crown Court) • Totality guideline (magistrates’ court) • General guideline—overarching principles (Crown Court) • General guideline—overarching principles (magistrates’ court) • Reduction in sentence for a guilty plea (Crown Court) • Reduction in...
Discover our 5 Checklists on Conspiracy
There are three main inchoate offences in English law: •conspiracy—where at least two people have agreed to commit a crime•attempt—where the defendant has tried to commit the offence and has got relatively close to achieving the objective (see Practice Note: Attempt), and•encouraging or assisting a crime (formerly incitement)—where the defendant must have encouraged or assisted another to commit a crime (see Practice Note: Encouraging and assisting criminality)An inchoate offence is one that is incomplete. Such offences are committed where the defendant takes certain steps towards the commission of a crime, but the actions fall short of the consummated crime. The exception to this is conspiracy to defraud, where the result to be achieved does not need to be a crime. This particular offence is dealt with in a separate Practice Note: Conspiracy to defraud. Inchoate offences cannot be charged on their own, ie there is no charge of conspiracy or attempt. There must be a substantive offence and the indictment must be drafted with reference to the complete offence, eg...
Offence of conspiracy to defraudConspiracy to defraud is a common law offence which was expressly preserved by section 5(2) of the Criminal Law Act 1977 (CLA 1977) and is triable only on indictment.The offence requires that two or more individuals dishonestly conspire to commit a fraud against a victim. It is a very wide offence and catches conduct that might not constitute an offence but which, by reason of two or more people agreeing to do it with the requisite intent, it becomes an offence.Common law conspiracy is therefore wider than statutory conspiracy because it does not require the agreement to be in respect of the commission of a substantive criminal offence.The statutory offence of conspiracy is found in CLA 1977, s 1. The statutory offence requires a conspiracy that will necessarily amount to or involve the commission of an offence by one or more of the parties to the agreement, or would do so, but for the existence of facts that render the commission of the offence or any of...
Discover our 337 Practice Notes on Conspiracy
Settlement agreement—arbitration This settlement Agreement is made on [date] Parties 1 [Name of entity], a [type of entity] with [type of liability] incorporated under the laws of [jurisdiction] with its registered address at [address] and with company number [company number] (Party 1); and 2 [Name of entity], a [type of entity] with [type of liability] incorporated under the laws of [jurisdiction] with its registered address at [address] and with company number [company number] (Party 2), each a ‘Party’ and together the ‘Parties’. Recitals: (A) A dispute has arisen between the parties [add relevant detail to give context to the dispute] (the Dispute). (B) On [date], Party 1 commenced arbitration proceedings against Party 2 (the Arbitration). On [date], the tribunal (comprising [arbitrators]) was appointed (the Tribunal). (C) [Provide further background information available to give context to this Agreement, including a brief description of the Arbitration, the arbitration agreement, the rules/procedures governing the Arbitration, whether the Arbitration is being administered by an arbitral institution and the case...
Pre-qualification questionnaire [Archived] Introduction The Authority intends to award a [contract OR framework agreement] for [requirement OR project] The procurement is subject to the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015), SI 2015/102. This pre-qualification questionnaire (PQQ) is based on the standard PQQ recommended to all contracting authorities in statutory guidance issued under PCR 2015, reg 107(1). The Authority will use the information provided in response to this PQQ to make an assessment of the Supplier’s economic and financial standing, technical and professional ability, and general good standing, and to decide who will be invited to [tender OR negotiate] to participate in a [competitive dialogue OR innovation partnership] procedure for the [contract OR framework agreement]. The background to the [requirement OR project] is set out in the accompanying Information Memorandum together with information on how the requirement is structured and the conditions of participation. PQQ responses will be assessed in accordance with the accompanying Evaluation Model. In this PQQ, ‘Authority’ means the...
Dive into our 5 Precedents related to Conspiracy
Are there any penalties which can be imposed on a union for intimidating behaviour by its representative or individual employees on a picket line? The ‘right to picket’ provisions in section 220 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (TULR(C)A 1992) provide protection from any liability arising from a worker’s attendance at or near certain premises for the purpose of peaceful picketing. It is a right to be at a certain place so as to have the opportunity of persuading fellow workers and/or suppliers not to cross the picket line. The 'right to picket' does not itself include a right to persuade. However, the actions on a picket line may give rise to a number of potential liabilities in tort for both the pickets and the organising union (such as the ‘industrial tort’ of inducing a person to break a contract). TULR(C)A 1992, s 220, provides no defence against any of these torts, but it may be possible by virtue of the statutory immunity...
In a claim by an employer against a former employee’s new employer for one of the economic torts (eg conspiracy, inducement to breach contract), what is the measure of damages? The new employer of the former employee may be made a party to any litigation involving the target employee as a result of the operation of the economic torts, including: • inducement/ procurement of breach of contract • conspiracy (lawful means conspiracy and unlawful means conspiracy), and • unlawful interference with business At final trial, an award of damages may be made against the offending employee's new employer for these economic torts. Where the damages claimed arise from a tort, the court seeks to place the claimant in the same position as if the wrong had not been committed. Loss of profit is the most likely kind of damage to be claimed, but the cost of recovering from the breach can also be claimed, and it is possible to claim exemplary damages. As a general principle,...
See the 17 Q&As about Conspiracy
A round-up of the latest trading standards prosecutions, including a shepherd receiving a suspended sentence for animal welfare and farming standards offences; a man handed suspended sentence after importing almost 1,000 unsafe scooters, e-scooters and e-bikes; builders given prison sentence for fraud; and three men handed suspended sentence for conspiring to commit fraud.
The US Department of Justice has sentenced Manuel Chang, the former Finance Minister of Mozambique, to 102 months in prison for his role in a $2 billion international fraud, bribery, and money laundering scheme. Chang was convicted of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering, having received $7 million in bribes to approve fraudulent loans. The scheme involved misrepresenting the use of loan proceeds to banks and investors, with over $200 million diverted for bribes and kickbacks. This resulted in substantial losses to investors due to loan defaults. Chang has been ordered to forfeit $7 million, with a restitution amount to be determined at a later date. This case is linked to a previous settlement in 2021 where Credit Suisse admitted to defrauding investors in related loan arrangements in coordinated enforcement action between the US and UK.
Read the latest 1259 News articles on Conspiracy
**Trials are provided to all UUÂãÁÄÖ±²¥ content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these UUÂãÁÄÖ±²¥ services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK, Ireland and selected UK overseas territories and Caribbean countries. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
0330 161 1234