header-logo header-logo

Between a rock & a hard place?

10 January 2019 / Jason Woodland
Issue: 7823 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Profession , Criminal
printer mail-detail
nlj_7823_woodland

Jason Woodland on parallel criminal & civil proceedings

  • Two recent court decisions reaffirm that there must be a ‘real’, rather than merely ‘notional’, risk of injustice when applying to stay civil fraud claims because of a related criminal investigation.

Defendants to civil proceedings for fraud will often find themselves also subject to parallel criminal proceedings or investigations. This can leave the defendant in a difficult position: how to deal with the civil claim before knowing the extent of the criminal charges or the evidence relied on by the prosecution?

Uncompromising approach

In recent times, the civil courts have taken an uncompromising approach to defendants faced with this problem, and required them to deal with both sets of proceedings in parallel. A defendant faced with this situation is often perceived as trying to ‘play the system’ and avoid setting out their position. As the judge put it in Panton v Financial Institutions Services Limited [2003] UKPC 95, [2003] All ER (D) 294 (Dec) ‘a stay would not be granted

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll