header-logo header-logo

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

Between a rock & a hard place?

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll