header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
10 January 2019 / Jason Woodland
Issue: 7823 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Profession , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Between a rock & a hard place?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
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

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll