SFO strongly criticised for numerous public law errors in failing to challenge company’s assertion of LPP while subject to Deferred Prosecution Agreement
- Related Member(s):
- Tim Owen QC
- Related Practice Area(s):
- Crime and Regulatory Law, Fraud, Financial and Business Crime
Taken from Tim Owen QC’s (Counsel for AL) case note.
In a case which raises novel issues concerning the scope of the Serious Fraud Office’s disclosure duty towards a defendant in criminal proceedings who had previously been employed by a company which had self-reported wrongdoing and secured a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (“DPA”), the Divisional Court (Holroyde LJ and Green J.) found numerous public law errors had tainted the SFO’s failure to challenge the company’s assertion of legal professional privilege (“LPP”) over the product of the internal investigation which led to the self-report.
To continue reading, please see here.
The judgment for R (AL) v Serious Fraud Office  EWHC 856 can be found here.