header-logo header-logo

G4S fraud trial collapses after SFO offers no evidence

10 March 2023
Categories: Legal News , Fraud , Criminal , Disclosure , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has come in for criticism over its decision to drop charges against three former G4S executives following a ten-year investigation.

The SFO investigation into allegations of fraud in connection with G4S’s contract to provide electronic monitoring services began in 2013. The SFO entered into a deferred prosecution agreement with G4S Care and Justice Services (UK), a wholly owned subsidiary of G4S, in July 2020, under which G4S accepted responsibility for three fraud offences against the Ministry of Justice and agreed to pay £38.5m plus costs of £5.9m.

In September 2020, the SFO charged the three senior executives with seven counts of fraud. The case was adjourned in January due to disclosure issues.

However, all three were acquitted at the Old Bailey this week after the SFO failed to offer evidence against the three and halted the case because ‘it was no longer in the public interest’ to pursue the charges.

A statement from Hickman & Rose, representing one of the former G4S executives, said the decision ‘represents another case whereby the prosecution of senior individuals following a corporate’s DPA has failed’.

Iskander Fernandez, head of white-collar crime and investigations at Kennedys, said: ‘Historically, the SFO hasn’t covered itself in glory when it comes to prosecuting individuals.

‘But to offer no evidence, particularly after an adjournment, smacks of a total inability to pull together a robust legal case for trial. How long does it actually need to prepare for trial? Although, the bigger question is perhaps, is the SFO is fit for purpose?

‘This case can now be added to the SFO’s catalogue of failings which includes its failure to successfully prosecute two Tesco executives in 2018 with the judge calling its case so weak that it could not be put to the jury. It was a similar tale with three Sarclad executives in 2019 and two former Serco executives in 2021.

‘This cannot be the swansong that outgoing director Lisa Osofsky, whose tenure comes to an end this year, must have been hoping for. It looks unavoidable that among the new director’s to do list will be a root and branch review of the SFO’s trial preparation approach.’

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Maria Karaiskos KC, Church Court Chambers

NLJ Career Profile: Maria Karaiskos KC, Church Court Chambers

Maria Karaiskos KC, recently appointed as the first female head of Church Court Chambers, discusses breaking down barriers, the lure of the courtroom, and the power of storytelling

Kingsley Napley—Jenny Higgins

Kingsley Napley—Jenny Higgins

Legal director joins regulatory practice to lead offering for actuarial sector

Bolt Burdon Kemp—Alan Collins & Danielle Vincent

Bolt Burdon Kemp—Alan Collins & Danielle Vincent

Bolt Burdon Kemp acquires Hugh James’ abuse team

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, Kelvin Rutledge KC of Cornerstone Barristers and Genevieve Screeche-Powell of Field Court Chambers examine the Court of Appeal’s rejection of a discrimination challenge to Tower Hamlets’ housing database
Michael Zander KC, Emeritus Professor at LSE, tracks the turbulent passage of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill through the House of Lords in this week's issue of NLJ. Two marathon debates drew contributions from nearly 200 peers, split between support, opposition and conditional approval
Alistair Mills of Landmark Chambers reflects on the Human Rights Act 1998 a quarter-century after it came into force, in this week's issue of NLJ
In his latest Civil Way column for NLJ, Stephen Gold surveys a raft of procedural changes and quirky disputes shaping civil practice. His message is clear: civil practitioners must brace for continual tweaks, unexpected contentions and rising costs in everyday litigation
Barbara Mills KC, chair of the Bar 2025 and joint head of chambers at 4PB, sets out in this week's NLJ how the profession will respond to Baroness Harriet Harman KC’s review into bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct at the Bar
back-to-top-scroll