2 posts from law firm Herbert Smith Freehills on 5 and 15 May were concerned with 2 recently released judgments in the UK which consider the “directing mind and will” of a company. The cases concern charges against Barclays plc and Barclays Bank plc relating to events flowing from the 2008 global financial crisis. The courts found that senior executives, including the CEO and CFO, did not represent the required “directing mind and will” of Barclays in the circumstances.  The judgments examined the well-known (and criticised) doctrine of “identification” and who constitutes the “directing mind and will” of a company and provide practical lessons on corporate governance in the criminal context.


If you’d like to help to contribute to the cost of the new laptop and desktop I have had to acquire, now that I am 5,000 miles away from my originals –

Author: raytodd2017

Chartered Legal Executive and former senior manager with Isle of Man Customs and Excise, where I was (amongst other things) Sanctions Officer (for UN/EU sanctions), Export Licensing Officer and Manager of the Legal-Library & Collectorate Support Section

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: