Corporate and Business Law (Global) · Fraudulent and criminal behaviour

Bribery and Corruption for ACCA Corporate and Business Law

Updated 11 October 2026 · Fact-checked

Bribery is offering, giving, requesting or accepting a financial or other advantage to induce improper performance of a function. Anti-bribery laws also make a company guilty if someone associated with it bribes to win business for it, unless the company had adequate procedures in place to prevent bribery.

Understand Bribery and Corruption

Bribery is giving or receiving an advantage to influence how someone performs a duty. The advantage can be money, a gift, a job, a holiday or a favour. The key idea is that the person is induced to act improperly, meaning in breach of a duty of good faith, impartiality or trust.

The ACCA LW syllabus follows the pattern of modern anti-bribery laws, of which the UK Bribery Act 2010 is the best-known model. Learn the four main offences. Giving a bribe (active bribery). Receiving a bribe (passive bribery). Bribing a foreign public official to obtain or keep business or a business advantage. And the corporate offence of failing to prevent bribery.

The corporate offence is the one students find hardest. A commercial organisation commits it if a person associated with it bribes another person intending to obtain or keep business, or an advantage in the conduct of business, for the organisation. An associated person can be an employee, agent or subsidiary, or anyone who performs services for the organisation. The company does not need to know about the bribe. That is why the offence is powerful.

The company has one defence: it had adequate procedures designed to prevent bribery. Guidance on this is usually summarised as six principles: proportionate procedures, top-level commitment, risk assessment, due diligence, communication and training, and monitoring and review. The company must prove the defence.

Penalties are serious. Individuals can face imprisonment and unlimited fines. Companies can face unlimited fines, and can also be excluded from public contracts and suffer severe reputational damage. Note that a facilitation payment (a small payment to speed up a routine action) is still treated as bribery under this model. It is not a safe exception. Reasonable, proportionate hospitality is different, as long as it is not intended to induce improper conduct.

Key formulas to remember

Bribe giving (active): Offer/promise/give advantage + intention to induce or reward improper performance; The test is the intention to induce improper performance, not the size of the advantage.
Bribe receiving (passive): Request/agree to receive/accept advantage + improper performance related to it; It does not matter whether the recipient benefits personally or whether a third party receives the advantage.
Bribing a foreign public official: Advantage offered to official + intention to influence them + aim of obtaining or retaining business or an advantage; There is no need to show the official acted improperly. Influence in their official capacity is enough.
Failing to prevent bribery: Associated person bribes + intent to obtain/keep business for the organisation + no adequate procedures = corporate offence; Strict liability style offence for the organisation. The company need not know about the bribe.
Adequate procedures: six principles: Proportionality · Top-level commitment · Risk assessment · Due diligence · Communication and training · Monitoring and review; Use as a checklist when advising on the defence. The burden of proof lies on the company.
Facilitation payments: Small payment to speed up routine action = still bribery; There is no exemption for them. Do not confuse them with proportionate, genuine hospitality.

How to solve Bribery and Corruption questions

Use this order for any scenario or objective question on bribery. It keeps you from jumping to the corporate offence when an individual offence is the answer.

1Identify who gave or received what. Note any advantage, however small, and who the parties are.
2Ask whether the advantage was meant to induce or reward improper performance of a function or duty.
3Check whether the other party is a foreign public official. If so, the test is influence to obtain or retain business.
4Decide whether the question is about an individual offence or the company. If a company is involved, ask whether the briber is an associated person.
5Check that the bribe was intended to obtain or keep business or an advantage for the company.
6If so, the company is liable for failing to prevent bribery unless it shows adequate procedures. Test against the six principles.
7State the likely penalties: imprisonment and fines for individuals; unlimited fines and wider consequences for the company.
8Write a clear conclusion that answers the exact question asked.

Quickest way: Four-question bribery check

When to use it: Use for Section A or Section B objective questions when you have about a minute per question.

Was an advantage offered, requested or given? If not, there is no bribery.
Was it meant to cause improper performance, or to influence a foreign official? If not, it may be lawful hospitality.
Was the person acting for the company an associated person who aimed to benefit it?
Did the company have adequate procedures? If yes, the defence applies. If no, the company is liable.

Common mistakes in Bribery and Corruption

Thinking the company must know about the bribe to be liable for failing to prevent it.
Students apply the usual rule that criminal liability needs a guilty mind.
Fix: Remember that the corporate offence is about the failure to have adequate procedures. The company's knowledge is not required.
Treating facilitation payments as lawful because they are small.
They are common in some countries and feel like a routine fee.
Fix: State that facilitation payments are still bribery. Only genuine, proportionate hospitality is acceptable.
Saying the prosecution must prove the company lacked adequate procedures.
Students assume the prosecution always carries the burden.
Fix: The company must prove it had adequate procedures. Say this clearly in written answers.
Limiting 'associated person' to employees.
Employees are the most obvious people acting for a company.
Fix: Include agents, subsidiaries, contractors and any person performing services for the company.
Listing the six principles without applying them to the scenario.
Students memorise the list and stop there.
Fix: Link each relevant principle to a fact in the question, for example no training given, or no due diligence on an agent.
Confusing bribery with fraud or money laundering.
All are financial crimes and the syllabus covers them together.
Fix: Bribery involves an advantage to induce improper conduct. Fraud involves deception for gain. Money laundering involves dealing with criminal property.

Worked examples

Example 1

Sanvi Ltd wins a construction contract abroad. Its local agent privately pays a government official a sum to secure the licence. Senior management did not know. Sanvi Ltd has no anti-bribery policy and has never trained its agents. Advise whether Sanvi Ltd may be liable.

Show the solution

The agent provided an advantage to a foreign public official to obtain a licence for business. That is a bribery offence by the agent.
The agent performs services for Sanvi Ltd, so is an associated person.
The bribe was intended to obtain business for Sanvi Ltd.
Management's lack of knowledge does not prevent the corporate offence.
Sanvi Ltd can escape only by proving adequate procedures. It has no policy, no training and no due diligence on the agent, so it cannot show the six principles were met.

Answer: Sanvi Ltd is likely guilty of failing to prevent bribery, because an associated person bribed to benefit the company and it cannot prove adequate procedures. It faces an unlimited fine and other consequences.

Example 2

Dhruv, a purchasing manager, accepts an expensive overseas holiday from a supplier. The supplier hopes Dhruv will award it a large order and ignore a cheaper rival bid. Identify the offences.

Show the solution

The supplier offered and gave an advantage (the holiday) intending to induce improper performance, namely ignoring a better bid. This is the offence of bribing.
Dhruv accepted the advantage and the expected performance is improper, because he owes a duty to his employer to choose fairly. This is the offence of being bribed.
If Dhruv's employer was not involved and had adequate procedures, the employer is not liable for the supplier's act, because the supplier was not acting to benefit the employer.
Both individuals face possible imprisonment and unlimited fines.

Answer: The supplier commits the offence of bribing and Dhruv commits the offence of being bribed. The employer is not liable for failing to prevent bribery on these facts, as neither person bribed to benefit it.

Exam tips

Name the specific offence in your answer. Examiners award marks for the correct label, such as failing to prevent bribery.
In Section B scenarios, look for an agent, subsidiary or intermediary. It is usually the clue that the corporate offence is being tested.
Learn the six adequate procedures principles by heart and tie each to a scenario fact.
Objective questions are all or nothing. Watch for options that say the company needs to have known, or that facilitation payments are exempt. Both are wrong.
In written answers, finish with the penalty and a clear conclusion in one or two sentences.

Practice questions from Fraudulent and criminal behaviour

Bribery and Corruption in other exams

The same ground in other exams, if you are preparing for more than one or want another angle on it.

Bribery and Corruption: frequently asked questions

What is the difference between bribery and a facilitation payment?

A facilitation payment is a small payment made to speed up a routine action the official must do anyway. It is still treated as bribery under this model. Bribery covers any advantage meant to induce improper performance, whatever its size.

What is the offence of failing to prevent bribery?

It is an offence by a commercial organisation when a person associated with it bribes another to obtain or keep business for the organisation. The organisation need not know about the bribe. It can defend itself only by proving it had adequate procedures.

What are adequate procedures?

They are the measures a company puts in place to prevent bribery by those acting for it. Guidance groups them into six principles: proportionate procedures, top-level commitment, risk assessment, due diligence, communication and training, and monitoring and review.

Is corporate hospitality illegal?

Not if it is genuine, reasonable and proportionate, and is not intended to induce improper performance. It becomes bribery when the aim is to influence a decision or reward improper conduct.