I just checked 5 contracts I had from around 2015, and only one mentioned convictions. Specifically:

> The Supplier warrants:

> that the Consultant has no criminal convictions which would reasonably affect the Company's and/or the Client's decision to allow the Consultant access to the Location(s), the Client's Systems or to provide the Services;

> fraud.

Depends on locale. In the UK (IANAL) it wouldn't be _fraud_, but would be grounds to terminating the contract. But not criminal.

Employer could potentially sue for damages, but there must be some damages for that.

And in Germany, it would be illegal to ask unless it was specifically relevant to the job – and courts have specifically decided that you can lie if you're asked and it's not relevant. The US tends to really overreach on that sort of thing, but it's not universal. It may even be that picking contracts in the EU would be useful.

> It may even be that picking contracts in the EU would be useful.

After Brexit he'd need a work permit for that, and I assume convictions are a factor with those.

One only needs a work permit if physically in the EU country, not working remotely from the UK.

Thanks - this is a very good point and looks hopeful for the OP. To the OP I suggest to confirm this with a lawyer; if it's indeed not criminal and the worst outcome of a lie is termination and a civil lawsuit (which requires proving damages) it might be worth betting on it.

The advantage of being an ex-lawyer is I do know this to be a criminal offence!

Fraud by false representation is a thing in the UK so I suspect that it might depend on the circumstances and the seriousness of the case but IANAL.

People describe anything and everything they don't agree with as 'fraud'.

Having had a conviction I don't want to pick up one for lying on my CV. In jail I knew someone convicted for just that, though I think it is rare.

Lying on resumes is so common, how on earth did someone go to jail for it?

yea, definitely struck me as odd too, most people bullshit a bit on CVs so whether there was more to it I don't know: TBH you don't usually ask people for details of why they're inside - it can get ... problematic.

I have never seen that clause.

And that may not be fraud of you have a lawyer analyse it.