Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 20 AUGUST 2026

A Criminal Resolution Is Not A Global Conclusion

Bracewell LLP
Bracewell LLP
Contributor
Bracewell LLP

Bracewell LLP

Paris is a vital energy hub in Europe, and our Paris office plays a central role in helping address...

View firm profile
Explore more from Bracewell LLP

British American Tobacco's $1.1 billion settlement with US authorities over North Korean sanctions violations appeared to close one chapter, but opened another as the company now faces multibillion-pound shareholder litigation in London and terrorism-related civil claims. This case illustrates how multinational corporations must carefully navigate the collateral consequences of government enforcement resolutions, as admissions made to one jurisdiction can fuel derivative litigation across multiple forums an

United KingdomCriminal Law

Most corporations, especially those operating globally and in challenging jurisdictions, consider government enforcement actions to be one of their most significant areas of legal risk, and rightfully so, as the US Department of Justice (DOJ), the US Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), and other US government entities have the power to institute far-reaching investigations, impose burdensome monitorships, and extract significant monetary penalties for violations of a variety of statutes and regulations. But what many companies fail to realize is that a resolution with the US government is not global, and significant risks may lie in derivative actions in other jurisdictions or civil forums.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from