header-logo header-logo

14 October 2019
Issue: 7859 / Categories: Legal News , Fraud , Criminal
printer mail-detail

SFO inspection highlights problems

Delays to cases at the beleaguered Serious Fraud Office (SFO) often occur due to staffing and resourcing issues, inspectors have found.

A key reason for the delay is the backlog of digital material waiting to be processed, according to a report published last week by Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI). The report, ‘Case progression in the SFO’, follows six cases in depth. It notes that a case can ‘involve terabytes of data, all of which has to be analysed and dealt with in accordance with the laws relating to privilege, disclosure and data protection that apply to all criminal cases’. Progress can also be held up where there is an international element, requiring the co-operation of another country’s legal system.

However, the report notes that the SFO has been proactive in dealing with staff shortages by providing training and development to upskill staff. For example, the SFO has trained more staff to become investigators and accountants, both disciplines where there were shortages.

In recent years, the SFO has suffered a number of high-profile setbacks, including the failure of a fraud case against two Tesco executives in 2018 and the collapsed trial of five brokers for LIBOR rigging in 2016. In February, it dropped two long-running and expensive investigations into Rolls-Royce and GlaxoSmithKline.

The inspectors recommended that more be done to ensure the timely progression of cases, but recognised the SFO has implemented some changes, including the development of a new case management system and more effective case management controls.

HM Chief Inspector Kevin McGinty said: ‘It would be wrong to read this report negatively and from the view that the SFO is ineffective: it is not. Getting staff to comply with process and be consistent, for line management to be more effective and for there to be better and more effective quality control will go a long way to tackle the recommendations set out in this report.’

Issue: 7859 / Categories: Legal News , Fraud , Criminal
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Regulatory team boosted by partner hire amid rising health and safety demand

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Legal director promoted to partner at specialist pensions firm

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Residential development capability expands with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll