header-logo header-logo

10 August 2020 / Stewart Kelly
Categories: Features , Profession , Covid-19 , Technology
printer mail-detail

Ground control: global investigations & intelligence

25692
Stewart Kelly of Ground Truth Intelligence outlines the benefits of a transparent corporate intelligence service

In brief

  • The intelligence and investigations sector has barely changed in 50 years—and clients are yearning for change.
  • Client frustration towards the traditional model.
  • The three main problems with the existing model are: cost, quality and risk.

The intelligence and investigations sector has changed little since Jules Kroll invented it almost 50 years ago. The basic structure relies on opacity: unclear information provenance, vague reporting, high fees.

Users of corporate intelligence services, such as law firms and in-house legal counsel, usually struggle to tell the difference between the dozens of service providers who pitch for business. Ground Truth Intelligence was formed to offer clients a genuine alternative to the status quo model.

For clients who just want a report—a stamp of approval to get through a compliance process —the status quo model works well. But for those who want to use the information, and for whom the substance really matters, it can

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

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

International arbitration team strengthened by double partner hire

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Firm celebrates trio holding senior regional law society and junior lawyers division roles

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Partner joins commercial and business litigation team in London

NEWS
The Legal Action Group (LAG)—the UK charity dedicated to advancing access to justice—has unveiled its calendar of training courses, seminars and conferences designed to support lawyers, advisers and other legal professionals in tackling key areas of public interest law
Refusing ADR is risky—but not always fatal. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed and Sanjay Dave Singh of the University of Leicester analyse Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd: despite repeated invitations to mediate, the defendant stood firm, made a £100,000 Part 36 offer and was ultimately ‘wholly vindicated’ at trial
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Employment law is shifting at the margins. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ this week, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School examines a Court of Appeal ruling confirming that volunteers are not a special legal species and may qualify as ‘workers’
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
back-to-top-scroll