ABSTRACT
Recent incidents have once again focused attention upon and generated debate about the ability or inability of the criminal law to regulate the activities of incorporated companies (Wells, 1988; 1989; 1990; 1993).2 Demands that companies be subject to the criminal law and attempts to use the law to meet these demands have a long history (Laski, 1921a; 1921b; W.J. Brown, 1905; Cranfield, 1914; Winn, 1929; Welsh, 1946).3 In general it is a history of the concept of corporate personality that is concerned with the legal capacities, liabilities, privileges, disabilities and responsibilities of the corporation. In particular it is a history of the imbrication of corporate personality and criminal law: of the criminal law’s attempt to negotiate and manage the troublesome perplexities of corporate personality. This essay will explore the nature of the legal practice that works to transcribe corporate personality into the criminal law and thereby invent corporate criminal liability. It will provide a description of that legal practice and consider the problems that are intrinsic to that practice. Given that there are many legal practices and many criminal practices, the primary emphasis of the essay will be upon English jurisprudence and academic commentaries.
