Suspicious alerts in money laundering – the Crédit Agricole case

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide an analysis of the recent Crédit Agricole case outcome, whereby the bank was found to have undertaken insufficient investigation and failed to follow through on reporting suspicious account activity, in line with AML compliance requirements. Design/methodology/approach The paper uses the two main legal documents in the Michailidis v Crédit Agricole Corporate and Investment (CACI) bank case and analyses the judgement details to discuss the implications for the banking and financial services sector on money laundering and AML compliance reporting requirements. Findings The main findings from the analysis are that banks have a greater legal responsibility towards detecting and reporting suspicious transactions than they would have previously considered. This includes identifying the source and purpose of fund transfers and establishing the beneficial ownership of recipients. Research limitations/implications The research topic is new, and therefore, analysis papers and other academic writing on this topic are limited. Practical implications The research paper has identified a number of implications to the banking sector on addressing AML deficiencies, especially the detection and reporting requirements of suspicious transactions. Social implications This paper has implications for the corporate social responsibility of banks and other financial services towards monitoring the source and use of money that is in their organisation. The paper identifies areas of legal responsibility that banks now have to manage, as part of their commitment to support the prevention of money laundering. Originality/value The originality of this paper is the current example of the Crédit Agricole case and the future legal implications for banks and financial services on suspicious transaction reporting and money laundering risk assessment.