Firm Profile > Rahman Ravelli > London, England
Rahman Ravelli Offices
36 WHITEFRIARS STREET
LONDON
EC4Y 8BQ
England
Rahman Ravelli > The Legal 500 Rankings
Fraud: white-collar crime (advice to individuals) Tier 3
Rahman Ravelli advises professionals and high-net-worth individuals in various sectors and countries on a broad spectrum of financial crime matters. Areas of experience include multi-million pound frauds, white-collar crime, corporate crime, money laundering and tax evasion. It also handles regulatory cases, Bribery Act matters and SFO investigations. Under the leadership of Aziz Rahman, the team handles cases involving international law enforcement agencies and regulators.Practice head(s):
Other key lawyers:
Testimonials
‘The team are personable, approachable and sympathetic’.
‘They apply unequalled attention to detail and preparation, allowing them to provide accurate and focused advice on cases of the utmost complexity’.
‘Rahman Ravelli is a leading firm that provides a high-value service to its clients’.
‘The firm consistently impresses with its attention to detail and the personal, genuine dedication of its professionals’.
‘Each member of the team passionately cares about the quality of the service given to their clients and aims to achieve only the most impressive results’.
‘Rahman Ravelli have an excellent track record in responding effectively to the challenges of the market’.
‘Aziz Rahman is one of the hardest working lawyers I know and has been the driving force and vision behind the firm’s successes’.
Crime: fraud Tier 1
Rahman Ravelli boasts an 'international reputation' in the field of fraud and financial crime, representing a variety of clients on money laundering, bribery, and embezzlement proceedings. The firm has notable capabilities in cross-border and multijurisdictional cases, co-operating effectively with global counsel. Practice head Aziz Rahman 'leads by example' on highly complex cases relating to deferred prosecution agreements and large-scale regulatory and criminal investigations. Directors Nicola Sharp and Syedur Rahman are noted for their work on multi-agency investigations, recovery proceedings and global bribery and corruption investigations.
Practice head(s):
Other key lawyers:
Testimonials
‘The team is strong, creative, resourceful and willing to go the extra mile.’
‘Rahman Ravelli now has a truly international reputation. In recent years the firm has grown into a juggernaut that deals with traditional fraud as well corporate governance and regulatory compliance both in the UK and overseas. One of the key strengths of the firm is its ability to generate trust and confidence in a very diverse client base. Compared to other firms in this area, I would say that the expansion of Rahmans had outpaced them all and the firm deserves a seat at the top table of crime/fraud solicitors.‘
‘Azizur Rahman has genuine star quality and a wonderful ability to engage with clients. He is undoubtedly the engine room of the firm and his energy has driven its expansion in recent years. Other notable practitioners at the firm include Syedur Rahman. He has an incredible depth of experience when it comes to fraud matters, and in particular those with an international element or where the National Crime Agency are involved. One of his specialisms is world-wide asset recovery. I would also recommend Paula Berry at the firm. She is incredibly incisive in my experience and always manages to drill down to the heart of the issue in every case. She never messes around and gives honest, frank advice to clients when it is needed.’
‘The growth in their international corporate services reach has been most noticeable over the past year. Targeted recruitment and being not afraid to invest in infrastructure has resulted in a firm that is well placed to take on its often “magic circle” rivals in the search for international corporate compliance work. Clearly, one of the leading corporate compliance firms in the North.‘
‘Rahman Ravelli really stands out as the most competent and professional in their field by a country mile. The firm is quietly competent and gets things done without fuss. That professionalism instils confidence in me and produces results. Other firms are of course professional, but the difference is that Rahman Ravelli has the quality staff and resources to enable the lawyers there to be brilliant at what they do.‘
‘Rahman Ravelli has a strong team of white collar lawyers and those dealing with sensitive private cases. I would certainly place the firm in the same category as any city lawyers.‘
‘Aziz Rahman is an exceptional solicitor who provides a gold standard service to his clients.‘
‘Aziz Rahman leads by example. He is across every case. Endlessly looking for ways to improve the client’s prospects. Very impressive.‘
Rahman Ravelli > Firm Profile
With offices in the City of London, Birmingham and Yorkshire, Rahman Ravelli is a national and international leader in serious and corporate fraud, white-collar crime, bribery and corruption, regulatory matters, complex crime, civil recovery and commercial litigation.
The firm: Since it was established in 2001, the practice has built an enviable reputation in the sectors it operates in. It has earned a strong national and international presence by defending the most significant, high-profile, multi-jurisdictional and multi-agency cases robustly and effectively and by managing high-stakes commercial litigation to obtain the best possible outcome. Its caseload here and abroad grows annually.
Its recent work includes some of the largest and most high-profile global corruption investigations, involvement in some of the UK’s first deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) negotiations and cross-border investment fraud cases. It has become increasingly popular with corporates and senior executives looking to investigate and self-report wrongdoing in order to achieve a civil, rather than a criminal, solution to a problem. The firm is also utilised by corporates and high net worth individuals for its investigative and legal expertise in international and multi-jurisdictional asset tracing and recovery work.
Rahman Ravelli’s track record of success, ability to recruit top-ranking lawyers, expertise and attention to detail have led to it being recommended to others by past and present clients, other law firms and professionals. Its strong, innovative and robust, proactive approach coupled with its network of worldwide experts has attracted clients from all over the world who need to resolve bribery and corruption allegations, corporate matters, tax investigations and regulatory issues. The firm is available around the clock and anywhere in the world to discuss its core specialisms of serious fraud, serious and white-collar crime, bribery and corruption and civil recovery, as well as defence against actions brought by regulatory bodies.
Types of work undertaken: The firm is known for its tenacious defence of clients’ interests in the face of attacks by governments and agencies. It regularly challenges allegations made by bodies such as the SFO, NCA, FCA and City of London Police and international organisations such as Interpol, FBI, OLAF and the SEC.
Fraud: Rahman Ravelli’s serious fraud expertise includes commercial fraud and business crime defence services, major tax fraud, international corruption and money laundering. SFO prosecutions are a speciality, with acquittals achieved in the UK’s largest-ever investment fraud trial and many large-scale, high-profile cases. HMRC defences, MTIC fraud and BIS, DTI and OFT investigations are handled by its experts.
Bribery/corruption: Rahman Ravelli works on bribery and corruption cases here and overseas that routinely involve billions of dollars, governments and companies of all sizes and from all industry sectors. It advises international companies regarding compliance and internal investigations. The firm’s client list includes corporates and professionals from all sectors, senior officials, high-net-worth individuals and members of the public being investigated by one or more agencies. Its caseload sees it representing the likes of lawyers, IFA’s, accountants, surveyors and bankers, as well as those working in the health and education sectors, charities, the Royal household, forex, pensions, mining and environmental schemes, motor transport and real estate.
Property fraud: Rahman Ravelli handles many of the biggest property fraud cases, including one which almost collapsed a major high-street bank. Rahman Ravelli regularly handles FCA matters and is instructed in major investment fraud cases involving hundreds of millions of pounds.
Regulatory: The firm’s regulatory department handles national and international cases; representing professionals and advising companies, including PLC’s, on corporate risk. Its serious crime expertise includes experience of complex, large-scale conspiracy allegations. The firm has developed specialist knowledge in tackling covert policing evidence relating to the right to privacy; including directed and intrusive surveillance, covert human intelligence sources and entrapment issues – techniques increasingly adopted by investigative bodies. The practice has experience in the fields of abuse of process and public interest immunity. Its case of R v H and C established the law in this area in the House of Lords in 2004. The case is the leading authority on disclosure and brought about a sweeping change regarding prosecution obligations on disclosure – an area where the firm excels.
Civil recovery: Rahman Ravelli’s expertise includes NCA, SFO, HMRC and CPS cases, here and abroad. Its powerful defence arguments saw it take the case of Gale to the Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights to protect the clients’ assets. The case defined important civil recovery issues and was the first such case to reach these courts. It also handles cases that involve unexplained wealth orders, which give authorities the chance to take assets from those they suspect of wrongdoing.
Commercial litigation including civil fraud: The firm regularly and aggressively challenges worldwide freezing orders, defends multijurisdictional actions and pursues corporate wrongdoing. Rahman Ravelli is adept at bringing civil fraud proceedings and conducting asset tracing and recovery actions for clients globally.
Main Contacts
| Department | Name | Telephone | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Senior and managing partner | Aziz Rahman | ||
| Corporate and financial crime | Aziz Rahman | ||
| Corporate and financial crime | Nicola Sharp | ||
| Corporate and financial crime | Neil Williams | ||
| Corporate and financial crime | Syed Rahman | ||
| Complex crime | Paula Berry | ||
| Complex crime | Shaff Rahman | ||
| Asset recovery and restraint | Syed Rahman | ||
| Regulatory and commercial litigation | Syed Rahman | ||
| Regulatory and commercial litigation | Nicola Sharp | ||
| Internal investigations and risk management | Syed Rahman | ||
| Internal investigations and risk management | Nicola Sharp | ||
| Internal investigations and risk management | Aziz Rahman | ||
| Serious and general crime | Zahir Ayoub |
Staff Figures
Number of UK partners : 1 Number of legal directors : 3 Number of other UK fee-earners : 15Interviews
Aziz Rahman, Senior and managing partner
Since founding business crime solicitors Rahman Ravelli in 2001, Aziz Rahman has overseen its rapid rise to prominence. Having won a number of awards and secured consistently high rankings in national and international legal guides, he took time to talk to The Legal 500. What do you see as the main points that differentiate Rahman Ravelli from your competitors?
Rahman Ravelli is known for being passionate and driven in support of its clients and for securing the best outcome in all of its cases. Whether they be the biggest global corruption cases or large, complex or multijurisdictional investigations, we get stuck in and come up with innovative strategies for them. We can call on the best QC’s, experts and other professionals to build the strongest possible team for clients.
Our reputation has grown because we have been at the forefront of major cases and the big legal issues as they develop. Whether it is mounting a powerful defence in a complex case, trying to obtain a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) for a client, carrying out internal investigations or devising procedures to prevent workplace legal problems, we make no apology for being at the cutting edge.
Satisfactory is not enough for Rahman Ravelli. We secure the very best outcome every time, either through negotiation and cooperation with the authorities or through robust, proactive defending that is bespoke to that client. This is achieved because we insist on having the best lawyers and working with only the highest-quality counsel.
This means we are in increasing demand to conduct internal investigations for corporations, professionals, directors and other senior business and financial figures.
Many in business see us as the firm to go to if they fear the effects of tighter regulation. We do what we say, have the experience and expertise to back up our claims and we deal with the likes of the SFO, FCA, NCA, City of London Police and other agencies all day, every day.
Which practices do you see growing in the next 12 months? What are the drivers behind that?
I believe we will continue our growth for the next 12 months. Simply because we have kept growing since the firm was founded in 2001. And fraud, bribery and business and financial crime have seen many changes in recent years; with new legislation and the authorities benefiting from more powers, better technology and increased cooperation between themselves.
I can see us taking on more work relating to obtaining deferred prosecution agreements (DPAs) over the next 12 months. The likely increased use of DPAs is likely to see more corporates requiring specialist legal advice on whether to seek one and, if so, how to go about it.
The past 12 months has certainly seen interesting developments in terms of DPAs:
* Three Tesco executives were acquitted of fraud that the company admitted was to blame for its accounting scandal when it reached its DPA with the SFO in 2017.
* Three former executives of Sarclad were cleared of bribery – three years after the technology company had reached a DPA regarding the allegations.
* The SFO dropped its investigation into individuals regarding systemic bribery at Rolls-Royce – two years after Rolls-Royce admitted there had been bribery when concluding a DPA with the SFO.
All these cases saw DPAs concluded for wrongdoing that nobody was convicted of – and that may see companies requiring legal expertise on the issue of whether to contest allegations rather than agree DPAs based on evidence that later proves inadequate to secure a conviction.
The SFO’s August 2019 issuing of corporate co-operation guidance will see companies seeking legal assistance regarding what they need to do to be seen to co-operate with the agency in order to obtain the most favourable outcome. The guidance states, among other things, that organisations will be expected to provide certification by independent counsel that material is privileged, should consult with the SFO before interviewing witnesses and suspects and should provide the agency with industry knowledge while under investigation. Such requirements are likely to result in many needing advice on how to both interpret and comply with the guidance in order to self-report wrongdoing.
The demand for our internal investigations services is likely to keep growing. There is also the likelihood of increased demand for representation in tax investigations; as the fall-out continues from the Panama Papers and now the Paradise Papers.
We seem to be gaining more cross-border, global and multijurisdictional work. Certainly the bribery and corruption arena is producing increasingly involved cases. Whether they be in Africa, South America or, more recently, CIS countries, such cases are touching on vitally important sectors such as energy and natural resources.
In such cases, we can utilise the international network of high-quality professionals we have developed over the years. I see that trend continuing. This is partly because investigating authorities are cooperating more and more. But it is also because we have come to be viewed by many foreign firms as the ones to go to if they want advice or assistance on a case that has a UK connection.
What is unique about business crime? And how is this reflected in your work?
Business crime is an area of law that presents many challenges. And anyone operating in this field has to not only be able to meet these challenges – they must be able to master them in order to do the very best for those individuals and corporates that they represent.
Business crime encompasses a very large and very broad range of offences. There can be civil sanctions, civil settlements and criminal prosecutions. Cases can be brought against an individual, a company or both. Investigations can be conducted by one or more agencies, those agencies can be national or international bodies and the investigations can take place in a number of countries.
All this means that any business crime solicitor who wants to be at the top of the profession has to have a wide range of skills and in-depth expertise in a number of very important areas.
It goes without saying that such a solicitor needs to know every aspect of business crime law and must be able to utilise this swiftly, intelligently and forcefully in the very best interests of their clients. They must be alert to every possibility, able to determine the next likely move by prosecutors or investigators before it has happened and capable of always acting in a way that will maximise the benefit to their clients.
A business crime solicitor has to be able to instantly pinpoint the best course of action for a client and take immediate and appropriate steps to make it happen. This is not just about using a working knowledge of the law: it is also about recognising the options available, the best way of obtaining the best option for a client and the most suitable way to challenge or negotiate with the authorities.
In business crime, there can be considerable scope for negotiation with investigators. It is vital that any business crime solicitor identifies that scope and acts accordingly to secure the best outcome. If there is little or no scope for negotiation, then the solicitor will be using their legal expertise and skill to challenge all aspects of the allegations against their client. This is about so much more than simply disputing the claims. It can be about questioning the credibility of potential witnesses or evidence, bringing legal challenges to the way the investigators have conducted their investigation, coordinating a legal defence across borders and making strong, logical arguments to explain a client’s behaviour.
What must be remembered about business crime is that there can be both a criminal element and a civil element – and we manage both for clients. On the criminal side, we have a reputation for strong, intelligent representation of corporates, senior business figures and high net worth individuals who are the subject of allegations that can lead to an investigation and charges being brought.
But, on the civil side, such allegations can prompt major, high-stakes, cross-border commercial disputes between both organisations and individuals. In such situations, we have proved adept at tracing and recovering assets on behalf of those who have suffered losses and who wish to bring a civil fraud action against those they believe to be responsible. Conversely, we also have a track record to be proud of in defending the assets of those who are subject to civil fraud action as a result of being accused of being to blame for the losses incurred by others. We are also increasingly being sought to advise those who think they are about to be subject to an unexplained wealth order and / or the civil recovery powers that the authorities have under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 to seize assets of a company or individual that they believe to be the proceeds of crime.
What are the reasons for your firm’s growth?
In answering the previous question, I explained the challenges of business crime and how solicitors working in this area of law need to respond to them. I believe that Rahman Ravelli has thrived because we have been able to identify and employ the very best people to take on those challenges and succeed.
Obviously, we insist on our solicitors having an unrivalled knowledge of their areas of law and an unbeatable ability when it comes to using that knowledge effectively. But we only want people working for us who empathise with clients and who will go about their work with a zeal and determination to do the absolute best for those who have placed their faith in us. That means developing strategies for all stages of an investigation: from assessing the best way to stop it going any further through to acting tactically and intelligently when it comes to dealing with the authorities and their approaches at any point in their dealings with our client.
On a similar note, we have also built up a network of professional experts and lawyers based abroad who approach our cases with the same principled drive and ambition to succeed. At Rahman Ravelli, we have developed in a way that has ensured that we are fortunate and privileged to team up with such fantastic, driven professionals. They share our passion to achieve the very best for our clients.
These talented and enthusiastic individuals see what we are looking to achieve in national and international cases and work with us to do everything possible to reach our goals.
As a result, anyone coming into contact with Rahman Ravelli soon comes to understand that we leave no stone unturned for those we represent. I think that our reputation for being so thorough is what has seen the firm grow. It has been a growth due to word-of-mouth recommendations coupled
with the successes we have achieved for clients.
What is the next logical step for the firm?
The next logical step is to continue to handle each and every case with the same determination to succeed that I mentioned earlier. Every day brings new cases or developments in current cases: they are the next logical steps and the most important ones.
At Rahman Ravelli, we have individuals with business expertise who handle matters such as our recent move to bigger premises in London. All such projects are carefully considered and acted upon in the way that is most appropriate for the firm.
But for myself and everyone working with me, the most important, logical steps are the ones we take for the corporates and individuals we represent. They have belief in us – and we need to make sure we obtain the absolute best outcome for them.
If we keep doing that (and I know we will) then the company will continue to grow, we will continue to receive glowing write-ups in the legal guides and I will be satisfied.
What’s the main change you’ve made in the firm that will benefit clients?
At Rahman Ravelli, it’s about working hard and working smart for those we represent. We are protecting the rights of those individuals, companies and organisations. That never changes. There is rarely the need for major change here. Our determination to be at the forefront of our profession
means we are always fine tuning rather than making major changes.
Is technology changing the way you interact with your clients and the services you can provide them?
We use technology to help us gain the maximum benefit for clients. But it does not change the personal interaction with clients; which is of paramount importance to us.
From the electronic serving of huge amounts of paperwork through to more specific analytical tools, technology is a huge aid. But it does not replace or alter either the interaction we have with clients or the services we provide.
Can you give us a practical example of how you have helped a client to add value to their business?
We defend those who are facing major threats to their livelihoods, their businesses, their reputations and even their liberty. Our work is about protecting everything that is important to them rather than any idea of “added value’’.
Each case is different but our defence approach never changes. We do everything to proactively tackle our clients’ accusers and the allegations they make.
Our corporate internal investigations for clients help them identify wrongdoing and those responsible. This can save them huge amounts of money, prevent damage to reputations, keep organisations functioning properly and allow individuals to keep practising without fear of
disbarment by their professional body. This all goes beyond the issue of adding value to a business.
Are clients looking for stability and strategic direction from their law firms? Where do you see the firm in three years’ time?
Clients want the best possible outcome from the legal situation that they are in. We give them that.
We give them strong, intelligent representation tailored specifically to them. Stability for clients comes from us helping them understand what is happening and giving them the best chance of a positive result. Our track record shows that.
We are successful because we put together every case carefully, we appoint the right people to the team and we identify and pursue the most appropriate strategy. Stability for clients can only come from success in their case. We ensure that they have the best chance of success.
In 2022, I hope to be looking back on three more years of success and continuing our upward trajectory.
Press Releases
Trading Abroad And Money Laundering Risks
21st April 2017Aziz Rahman explains what those trading internationally need to do to ensure they are not targeted by money launderers.
The Future For Corporate Liability
21st April 2017With the government looking at how to change the law when it comes to prosecuting companies, Aziz Rahman considers the possibilities.
Payment Regulations And Compliance
21st April 2017Ben Ticehurst explains why new regulations regarding company payment practices are a sharp reminder of the need to be legally compliant.
Money Laundering Obligations And Property Professionals
21st April 2017With the housing market facing further scrutiny regarding money laundering, Aziz Rahman outlines what those working in the property sector must do to stay within the law.
The Rolls-royce Dpa – Lessons That Can Be Learnt
9th March 2017Aziz Rahman outlines the lessons that corporates and senior executives under investigation can learn from the huge Rolls-Royce bribery settlement.
Tackling Business Crime In Your Workplace
9th March 2017Failure to prevent fraud and other business crime can prove costly to companies. Ben Ticehurst and Aziz Rahman consider what can be done to identify wrongdoing and the options available when it is found.
Carbon Credit Fraud – Avoiding The Pitfalls
9th March 2017Neil Williams and Aziz Rahman explain the need to make sure your involvement in a carbon credits scheme stays on the right side of the law.
Defending Sfo Accusations
9th March 2017Aziz Rahman explains how the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) builds a case – and how it can be challenged.
Identifying And Investigating Investment Fraud
18th January 2017Autonomy’s chief financial officer has been charged with fraud over allegations he misled investors. But what is investment fraud? And what are your options if you are defrauded? Aziz Rahman and Neil Williams explain.
The Jp Morgan Scandal And The Definition Of Bribery
18th January 2017JP Morgan is paying $264M to settle allegations of bribery over its hiring of children of key Chinese decision makers to try and secure business. Aziz Rahman explains what constitutes bribery and how to prevent it.
Bringing A Private Prosecution
18th January 2017Aziz Rahman and Ben Ticehurst explain what you can do if you have fraud committed against you or your company.
Challenging Prosecution Allegations At The Investigation Stage
18th January 2017The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has decided not to prosecute Soma Oil and Gas regarding corruption in Somalia, due to insufficient evidence. Aziz Rahman looks at what insufficient evidence means and how to challenge prosecution allegations.
Bitter Pill
9th November 2016Aziz Rahman explains why the latest pharmaceutical bribery scandal emphasises the need for companies to have a strong compliance policy.
No Avoiding It
9th November 2016Accountants and advisors could face tougher fines for helping clients avoid paying tax. So how can they make sure they do not fall foul of the law?
Fair Trade?
9th November 2016Aziz Rahman explains the difference between wrongful and fraudulent trading and outlines what those in business need to know to avoid being accused of either.
Collapse
9th November 2016Aziz Rahman examines some of the issues involved before, during and after a company collapses.
Damage Limitation
9th November 2016Putting right the wrongs and minimising the damage when your company is accused of business crime.
Lengthy Sfo Investigations
9th November 2016Aziz Rahman considers whether SFO investigations could be concluded quicker.
Insolvency And Criminal Investigations
9th November 2016Rahman Ravelli’s Nicola Sharp and Syedur Rahman explain the importance of early legal advice when facing questions regarding a company’s collapse.
Preventing Fraud And Money Laundering
9th November 2016The government wants corporate executives charged when their staff carry out offences such as fraud and money laundering. How can you make sure you’re not one of those prosecuted?
Pensions and the risk of fraud
9th November 2016What those working in pensions must do to avoid being a victim of fraud – or being accused of it.
Why Those In Finance Must Tackle Money Laundering
9th November 2016With the authorities looking for more ways of tackling money laundering, Aziz Rahman explains why those working in finance must stop it for themselves.
Legal Developments
The Admissibility of Unlawfully Obtained Evidence
6th April 2021Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli details a case that raises issues around evidence gathering.
The Limits of the Bankers’ Book Evidence Act 1879
6th April 2021Nicola Sharp considers a recent case that highlighted the scope of the Act.
UK Courts’ Authority in Ongoing Fraud Cases
6th April 2021 Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli outlines a case that clarifies when jurisdiction can be triggered.The Art Market’s Money Laundering Deadline
1st April 2021Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli outlines the money laundering obligations facing those in the art dealing world.
The EBA’s Guidance on Money Laundering Risk
1st April 2021Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli outlines the latest guidelines from the European Banking Authority regarding money laundering and terrorist financing.
The UK’s Sanctions Workload
1st April 2021Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli assesses the post-Brexit sanctions challenges facing the UK – and how it has responded.
The FCA’s evolving approach to cryptocurrency
1st April 2021 Josie Welland, of financial crime specialists Rahman Ravelli, outlines recent developments and proposals regarding cryptocurrency regulation.SPACS AND THE LAW
1st April 2021Syedur Rahman, partner at financial crime specialists Rahman Ravelli, assesses the legal issues relevant to the rise of special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs).
The admissibility of opinion evidence
1st March 2021 Syed Rahman of Rahman Ravelli details a case that saw the court deny permission to use expert evidence.Varying Proprietary Injunctions
1st March 2021 Syed Rahman of Rahman Ravelli considers two recent cases that focus on a defendant’s ability to vary a proprietary injunction.Without Prejudice: Privileged Communications and Unambiguous Impropriety
1st March 2021 Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli considers a case that emphasises that what is communicated in without prejudice privilege will remain protected unless it meets particular criteriaThe EU Market Abuse Directive and the right to silence
1st March 2021 Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli considers a ruling that affects an individual’s ability to avoid self-incriminationThe Quincecare Duty and APP fraud
1st March 2021 Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli considers a recent case that examined banks’ duties to prevent customers falling victim to push payment fraud.KBR, THE SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE AND SECTION 2 NOTICES
1st March 2021 Aziz Rahman assesses the implications of the Serious Fraud Office’s defeat in a Supreme Court case regarding its ability to use Section 2 of the Criminal Justice Act to obtain documents held in other countries.THE UNITED STATES ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING ACT 2020
1st March 2021 Joshua Ray, Partner at Rahman Ravelli, gives a breakdown of the main points of the US’ latest anti-money laundering legislationINVESTIGATING BRIBERY
9th February 2021 Aziz Rahman and Joshua Ray of Rahman Ravelli detail the SFO’s powers and how companies should approach internally investigating allegations of bribery The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) receives information from many sources, which it assesses to see if it is worthy of investigation. If the SFO believes the situation undermines UK financial and corporate interests, it will accept it for investigation; involving the unique range of powers it has under Section 2 of the Criminal Justice Act 1987.THE COLLATERAL PURPOSE RULE OF DISCLOSED DOCUMENTS
9th February 2021 Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli considers a case that may offer victims of fraud more options for recourse. In I.F.T. S.A.L. Offshore v Barclays Bank PLC [2020] EWHC 3125 (Offshore), the High Court recently considered the circumstances that are appropriate for a party to use disclosed documents for collateral purposes, contrary to 31.22 of the civil procedure rules (CPR 31.22).DOCUMENT DISCLOSURE FOR MORE THAN ONE CASE
9th February 2021 Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli outlines the issues involved in obtaining evidence used in civil proceedings for parallel criminal cases. The use of evidence obtained for civil proceedings in any parallel or subsequent cross-border criminal proceedings requires careful consideration. Admissibility of such evidence is an issue that arises regularly.Closure of Bitcoin trading accounts
9th February 2021 Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli assesses the implications of a case that highlights the issues facing financial institutions when dealing with the termination of cryptocurrency accounts. In the recent case of Ang v Reliantco Investments Ltd [2020] EWHC 3242 (Comm), the Commercial Court considered a dispute that arose from the termination of the claimant’s Bitcoin trading account (and cancellation of open trades) by the defendant (an investment company), following suspicions of money laundering.Summary Judgement and Procedural Defects
9th February 2021 Syed Rahman of Rahman Ravelli outlines a case that emphasises the importance of knowing the rules – and their limitations - regarding summary judgement. A recent case highlighted the fact that the safeguards contained within Civil Procedure Rule 24 (CPR 24) can be dispensed with if procedural defects are remedied or are capable of being remedied.Cryptocurrency Fraud: A Significant Judgement
9th February 2021 Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli details a recent judgement that could be of huge importance in crypto-related fraud and asset recovery cases. Judgement in a recent case looks set to be potentially significant in relation to cryptocurrency fraud and asset recovery.THE G20 AND FATF’S MONEY LAUNDERING MEASURES
6th January 2021 Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli summarises the G20’s support for the Financial Action Task Force’s approach to tackling money laundering6AMLD: THE NEED FOR CLARITY
4th January 2021Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli highlights some questions that need answers regarding the Sixth Anti-Money Laundering Directive
DEFERRED PROSECUTION AGREEMENTS: A COMPARISON OF THE US AND UK
4th January 2021 Josie Welland of Rahman Ravelli assesses the key differences in the development and use of deferred prosecution agreementsSPOOFING AND MARKET MANIPULATION – 2020 IN REVIEW
4th January 2021Joshua Ray of Rahman Ravelli examines the past year’s notable market abuse events
PRINTING TRADES AND THE FCA
4th January 2021 After an options broker was fined millions for printing trades, Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli examines the Financial Conduct Authority’s approach to the practice.THE SFO SECURES £1.2M AFTER INVESTIGATION LINKED TO BRAZILIAN CORRUPTION
2nd December 2020Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli details the Serious Fraud Office’s securing of assets with connections to the Operation Car Wash scandal.
ASSESSING THE SFO’S GUIDANCE ON DEFERRED PROSECUTION AGREEMENTS
2nd December 2020 Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli examines the value of the Serious Fraud Office’s DPA guidanceWHAT CORPORATES NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE SFO’S DEFERRED PROSECUTION AGREEMENT GUIDANCE
2nd December 2020Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli considers the Serious Fraud Office’s DPA guidance and what it means for corporates’ general counsel.
FURTHER REFINEMENT OF THE DISCLOSURE PILOT SCHEME
2nd December 2020Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli examines attempts to tackle disclosure problems in modern litigation.
THE FCA IN THE PANDEMIC
2nd December 2020The Financial Conduct Authority has disclosed information about the size of its caseload this year. Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli considers how it is functioning in the pandemic.
The Financial Conduct Authority and Liquidation Stays
2nd December 2020 Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli examines a case that ruled on whether a Warning Notice can be issued while there is a liquidation stay on action and proceedings.TAX FRAUD – A CIVIL AND CRIMINAL ISSUE
2nd December 2020Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli assesses a case that clarifies HM Revenue and Customs’ scope for deciding whether to bring criminal or civil proceedings.
ESMA AND CUM-EX
2nd December 2020Syed Rahman of Rahman Ravelli details the main points from the European Securities and Markets Authority report on withholding tax schemes.
THE LAW COMMISSION’S CONSULTATION ON REFORM OF THE CONFISCATION REGIME
11th November 2020 Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli details the Commission’s proposals for reform of Part 2 of POCATHE FCA, ITS NEW MAN AT THE TOP AND THE ISSUES HE MUST ADDRESS
11th November 2020 Syed Rahman of Rahman Ravelli considers the challenges facing the new head of the Financial Conduct Authority.COMPANIES HOUSE AND CORPORATE TRANSPARENCY
11th November 2020 Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli outlines plans for director identity checks to tackle crime.PROPOSED NEW DISCLOSURE POWERS FOR HMRC
11th November 2020 Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli details the finance bill measures to make it easier for HM Revenue and Customs to gain information about individuals.The limits of reflective loss are redrawn
22nd October 2020 Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli outlines a Supreme Court case that clarifies the limitations of the reflective loss principle.The Standard of Proof in Civil Fraud Claims
22nd October 2020 Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli details a case that may make it easier for claimants to succeed in fraud litigation in English courts.The Court of Appeal’s decision in Bank St Petersburg PJSC v Vitaly Arkhangelsky & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 408 (Bank St Petersburg PJSC v Vitaly Arkhangelsky) explores arguably the most important principle to consider when attempting to prove fraud - the standard of proof applicable to civil fraud claims.CFTC Continues to (Wrongfully) Target Small Overseas “Spoofers”
20th October 2020 Joshua Ray of Rahman Ravelli details the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s current hardline approach to allegations of spoofing. Despite the recent failure of two defendants to have a spoofing indictment dismissed, he believes there are strong grounds for challenging CFTC allegations.Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli considers the principle of waiver of privilege.
16th October 2020 The issue of lawyers’ advice contained within witness evidence and the waiving of privilege was examined in the case of PCP Capital Partners LLP and another V Barclays Bank plc [2020] EWHC 1393 (Comm).LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE AND FOREIGN LAWYERS
16th October 2020 Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli details the case of PJSC Tatneft v Bogolyubov and Others [2020] and the significance of the protection it offers communications made by non-UK lawyers.ANTI-SUIT INJUNCTIONS AND FOREIGN PROCEEDINGS
16th October 2020 Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli considers how a court dealt with the issue of foreign ‘avoidance’ claims and the interplay between civil litigation and arbitration on the international stage.SEARCH ORDER VARIATIONS DUE TO COVID-19
16th October 2020 Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli details a case that shows the court approach to search order safety in a pandemic.FOREIGN CLAIMS AND UK JURISDICTION
16th October 2020 Syed Rahman of Rahman Ravelli assesses the doctrine of forum (non) conveniens and a court’s decision regarding jurisdiction on a foreign claim.HM REVENUE AND CUSTOMS AND HYBRID ARBITRAGE
16th October 2020 Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli assesses HMRC’s action against General ElectricFAILING TO PREVENT TAX EVASION
16th October 2020 Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli outlines the offences created by Part 3 of the Criminal Finances Act, their relevance in this COVID-19 era and the appropriate corporate response.Freezing orders and asset recovery after litigation
23rd September 2020 Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli outlines a case that demonstrates the extent to which courts will award freezing orders to assist in asset recovery after litigation.Private Prosecutions: The Process, Defendants’ Options and Mixed Motives
23rd September 2020 Neil Williams of Rahman Ravelli outlines what is involved in commencing a private prosecution.The private prosecution process begins with the laying of an information – also referred to as applying for a summons – which is an act carried out by the person or organisation bringing the prosecution. This is the first step that needs to be taken by an individual or corporate that sees a private prosecution as the best option available to them.Civil Recovery: Comparing POCA to the US approach
23rd September 2020 Joshua Ray of Rahman Ravelli outlines the limitations of Part 5 of the Proceeds of Crime Act highlighted by the case of Gulnara Karimova. The Serious Fraud Office’s (SFO’s) long-running efforts to seize £33M of UK real estate linked to Gulnara Karimova, the imprisoned first-daughter of former Uzbekistan leader Islam Karimov, took another twist in June when the High Court issued an order giving the agency a further six months to try to serve her with its claim.Freezing injunctions and crypto-related investment fraud
23rd September 2020 Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli examines a case that underlines the courts’ continuing tough approach when it comes to suspected investment fraud involving cryptoasset schemes.Foreign Claims and UK Jurisdiction
23rd September 2020 Syed Rahman of Rahman Ravelli assesses the doctrine of forum (non) conveniens and a court’s decision regarding jurisdiction on a foreign claim. In the context of civil litigation, forum conveniens is a commonly-considered principle wherein the court decides whether to permit the service of proceedings outside the jurisdiction through the English courts, or to acknowledge that another forum would be more appropriate.Cost Protections Under a Part 36 Offer
23rd September 2020 Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli considers a case that outlines the possible consequences of withdrawing a Part 36 offer.In the recent judgement of Blackpool Borough Council v Volkerfitzpatrick Ltd [2020] EWHC 2128, the High Court granted the defendant a favourable costs order, in circumstances where a claimant failed to beat a defendant’s Part 36 offer. The case serves as an important reminder that a party that withdraws a Part 36 offer loses the costs protection associated with Part 36 and then has to rely on the court’s general discretion.U.S. extradition challenges
23rd September 2020 Joshua Ray of Rahman Ravelli outlines the issues in a case that shows how British courts can be receptive to challenges to US extradition attempts. At an extradition hearing in Westminster Magistrates Court in July 2020, counsel for the US Department of Justice (DOJ) made major concessions in its effort to extradite Abraaj Group founder, Arif Naqvi, from the UK.FCA regulation and pensions advice
10th September 2020 Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli outlines a case that emphasises the important distinction between regulated and unregulated firms regarding pensions advice.The High Court has ruled in favour of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) in a civil action against two firms and their directors who induced clients to transfer their pensions into Self-Invested Personal Pensions (SIPP’s) and alternative investments without FCA authorisation.WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW WHEN CONSIDERING BRINGING A PRIVATE PROSECUTION
20th August 2020Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli outlines the procedure for bringing a private prosecution and the issues that have to be considered before going ahead.
FREEZING ORDERS AND ASSET RECOVERY AFTER LITIGATION
20th August 2020Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli outlines a case that demonstrates the extent to which courts will award freezing orders to assist in asset recovery after litigation.
PRIVATE PROSECUTIONS: THE PROCESS, DEFENDANTS’ OPTIONS AND MIXED MOTIVES
20th August 2020 Neil Williams of Rahman Ravelli outlines what is involved in commencing a private prosecution.THE EVER-EVOLVING APPLICATION OF LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE
20th August 2020Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli assesses a case that establishes that it is the duty of an auditor to gauge whether a document is protected by legal professional privilege.
CRYPTOASSETS AND MONEY LAUNDERING REGULATION
20th August 2020 Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli assesses the scope and likely impact of anti-money laundering measures in relation to cryptoassets.FCA REGULATION AND PENSIONS ADVICE
20th August 2020 Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli outlines a case that emphasises the important distinction between regulated and unregulated firms regarding pensions advice.CIVIL LITIGATION – EXCEPTION TO THE WITHOUT PREJUDICE RULE
27th July 2020Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli considers a case that emphasises the protection offered by the without prejudice rules is not absolute.
ESTABLISHING THE RISK OF DISSIPATION WHEN APPLYING FOR A FREEZING ORDER
27th July 2020 Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli considers the importance of proof of a dissipation risk in freezing order applications, with reference to the recent case of Les Ambassadeurs Club Limited v Sheikh Salah Hamdan Albluewi [2020].CORPORATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY AND THE BARCLAYS JUDGEMENTS
9th July 2020 Neil Williams of Rahman Ravelli considers what does and does not constitute the directing mind and will of a company.CYBERCRIME, COVID-19 AND THE COMPUTER MISUSE ACT 1990
2nd July 2020 The authorities have been warning about the risk of cyber crime in the current pandemic. Syedur Rahman of business crime solicitors Rahman Ravelli considers the strengths and weaknesses of the Computer Misuse Act; under which cyber crime prosecutions are brought.CLARIFICATION OF DISHONESTY
2nd July 2020 Neil Williams of Rahman Ravelli considers the clarification of the test for dishonesty in R v Barton and Booth [2020] and its implications for complex fraud prosecutions.CORPORATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY AND THE BARCLAYS JUDGEMENTS
19th June 2020 Neil Williams of Rahman Ravelli considers what does and does not constitute the directing mind and will of a company.LIMITS ON BRINGING CIVIL FRAUD CLAIMS IN MULTIPLE JURISDICTIONS
19th June 2020 Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli examines Federal Republic of Nigeria v Royal Dutch Shell & Others [2020]; a case that focused on where and when civil fraud claims can be brought.THE TORT OF DECEIT AND CLIENTS’ INTERESTS
19th June 2020 Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli examines the case of Barrowfen Properties Ltd v Patel & Ors[2020], which highlighted the challenge solicitors can face of representing aclient’s best interests while following best practice. In BarrowfenProperties Ltd v Patel & Ors [2020], the High Court has provided someimportant reminders about the conduct expected of solicitors regarding a claimfor tort of deceit. In this case, a strike out application was made by Stevens& Bolton, who were the second defendant. The strike out application referred to the claimant’s allegations ofdishonest assistance, deceit, and unlawful means conspiracy. This was rejected byMr Justice Birss, who stated that although the allegations were “very grave’’they needed to be tested in court. The outcome of the case illustrates the balance that has tobe struck between acting in the best interests of a client while also followingbest practice. The Case The strike out application arose as the result of one of anumber of claims that were brought in different jurisdictions by members of awealthy family that has an extensive network of companies around the world.Barrowfen Properties Limited (Barrowfen) was the claimant. It forms part of thenetwork of companies owned by the family. The first defendant, Girish Patel (Girish),is a member of the family and former director of Barrowfen. The seconddefendant, Stevens & Bolton, is a firm of solicitors that acted for theclaimant at one time. The third defendant, Barrowfen II, is a companycontrolled by Girish. The claim was an action for damages relating to what theclaimant contended was an attempt by Girish to take or maintain sole personalcontrol of Barrowfen so as to gain control of a valuable commercial property itowned. Barrowfen claimed that after attempts to take it over had beenunsuccessful, Girish commenced a plan to acquire direct control of the propertyby putting the company into administration. Barrowfen was indebted to Zurich Assurance for approximately£850,000, secured by a debenture. Girish set up a new company, Barrowfen II,and made representations that Barrowfen II was to take an assignment of the loan and debenture from Zurich to saveBarrowfen from inevitable enforcement action by Zurich. The central allegation at the hearing was that Stevens &Bolton misled Barrowfen’s other directors about the true purpose of theassignment; first in a letter dated 4 December 2015 and then at a meeting on 9December 2015. Stevens & Bolton was accused of giving a deliberatelymisleading impression that the assignment had been taken in order to protectBarrowfen from enforcement of the loan and debenture when, in reality, the planwas for Barrowfen II to place Barrowfen into administration (the plan). Stevens & Bolton were not acting for Barrowfen at thatpoint but were acting for Girish and Barrowfen II. On 4 December 2015, Stevens& Bolton wrote a letter to the solicitors who acted on behalf ofBarrowfen’s other directors (the letter) stating: “…The Company [Barrowfen] was also threatened withenforcement action by Zurich, the first charge holder. However, that charge hasbeen bought out and has been assigned to Barrowfen Properties II Limited sothere is no immediate threat to wind up the Company from Zurich.” A key part of the claimant’s case is based on the lastsentence in that passage. The claimant avers that the letter does not mentionthe plan, which by then would have already been formulated and which Stevens& Bolton would have been well aware of. Therefore, the claimant claimed, inthat context, Stevens & Bolton’s reassurance that there was no immediatethreat to wind up the company from Zurich presented a deliberately misleadinghalf-truth. On 9 December 2015, and in response to the letter, a meetingtook place between Girish, Stevens & Bolton and Prashant (another directorof Barrowfen) to discuss a buy-out of Barrowfen shares by its shareholders inthe event of a members voluntary liquidation having to be pursued. Towards theend of the meeting, Prashant asked if he could see the terms of the Zurich loanand asked, “whether there is a particular position as regards to thisassignment”. Stevens & Bolton replied “there was nothing inparticular to tell Prashant about this, accept [sic] Zurich was pushingfor payment...” and that “…the assignment of the loan was a measure taken toprevent Zurich from enforcing the loan, which it looked certain to do.” Despitethe direct question about the terms of the Zurich loan and the assignment toBarrowfen II, the claimant claims Stevens & Bolton presented anotherdeliberate misleading half-truth in an effort to conceal the plan. Tort of deceit Tort of deceit (sometimes known as fraudulentmisrepresentation) is the actional wrong most closely identified with the civillaw concept of fraud. In essence, tort provides a basis for a person who hasbeen lied to or otherwise deliberately misled to seek redress for harm he orshe has suffered as a consequence. In order for a claimant to succeed in the tort of deceit, theyhave to be able to establish that: 1. Thedefendant made representation which was false 2. Thedefendant knew that the representation was made and that it was untrue, or was recklessas to its truth or falsity. 3. Thedefendant intended that the representation would induce the claimant to act orrefrain from acting. 4. Theclaimant was in fact induced by the representation to act or refrain fromacting 5. The claimantthereby suffered a loss Outcome of the Case The judge struck out the allegations of dishonesty relatingto the representations made in the letter of 4 December 2015 but refused to doso in relation to the representations made during the meeting on 9 December. HHJ Birss said: “The writer of the letter was entitled tohave in mind that the clients who would receive the letter would be advised bytheir own lawyers about it. An experienced lawyer acting for the recipient inthis context might well have taken the fact that nothing was being said aboutwhat Barrowfen II might do as a hint, and replied with a direct question aboutBarrowfen II’s plans, but that does not turn the letter into amisrepresentation or a half-truth.” Stevens & Bolton stressed that it owed no duty toBarrowfen at the time. But HHJ Birss described this as “irrelevant andpotentially misleading”. It was explained that no-one is entitled todishonestly and deliberately make a false representation to another person,intending that they rely on that to their detriment and - assuming they do relyon it - commit the tort of deceit but then attempt to excuse it on the groundthat no duty was owed to their victim. While it might have been correct that Stevens& Bolton did not owe a duty to Barrowfen at the relevant time, they did owethem a duty not to practice deceit. HHJ went on further to state “The fact a solicitor does notact for the questioner does not entitle them to give a knowingly misleadinganswer and practice a deceit. Honest approaches which were available includedgiving no answer at all or a full one.” The claimant’s claim is to proceed to trial in early 2021. Conclusion This case shows the difficulties of acting in a client’sbest interests while, at the same time, adhering to professionalresponsibilities. This is echoed by Birss J who acknowledged that “Legalrepresentatives are often put in a difficult position when asked directquestions by their client’s rivals.” While it can be difficult to maintain a balance betweenacting in the client’s best interest and doing what is considered “bestpractice”, as a legal professional, it is our duty to act with correct conductto maintain public confidence.THE CHALLENGES OF BRINGING A CLAIM FOR DECEIT
19th June 2020 Syedur Rahman ofRahman Ravelli examines this month’s judgment in the case of Nitron Group BV vNitron Group BV & Ors [2020], which centred on the tort of deceit andnegligence in contract negotiations.FREEZING ORDERS – THE IMPORTANCE OF CAUTION
19th June 2020 Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli considers the impact of the dismissed appeal in the case of ArcelorMittal USA LLC v Mr Ravi Ruia and others [2020]WHISTLEBLOWING AND THE FINANCIAL CONDUCT AUTHORITY
23rd March 2020 Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli examines the obligations the FCA places on businesses regarding whistleblowingTACKLING PUSH PAYMENT FRAUD
23rd March 2020 SyedurRahman of Rahman Ravelli outlines push payment fraud and the value of pursuinginjunctions in such casesCONTESTING ACCOUNT FORFEITURE ORDERS
16th March 2020 Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli assesses the first contested account forfeiture application.TRUSTEE CLAIMANTS’ ABILITY TO USE NORWICH PHARMACAL RELIEF AND BANKERS TRUST ORDERS TO RECOVER MIS
3rd March 2020Syedur Rahman ofRahman Ravelli considers a case with significance for those acting as trusteeswho are seeking to recover assets.
CIVIL LITIGATION: USING PART 36 OFFERS TO SETTLE A DISPUTE EARLY
3rd March 2020 Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli outlines the scope that Part 36 of the Civil Procedures Rules offers to resolve civil litigation before it reaches court, including the recent development of a nil offer.THE REGISTRATION OF OVERSEAS ENTITIES BILL
20th February 2020 Neil Williams of Rahman Ravelli explains the thinking behind the Bill, the measures it contains and the proposed civil and criminal penalties it may carry.MISCONDUCT: THE FINANCIAL REPORTING COUNCIL’S VIEW
28th January 2020 Nicola Sharp ofRahman Ravelli explains the significance of a Financial Reporting Council (FRC)Tribunal decision regarding misconduct.EVALUATING COMPLIANCE PROGRAMMES – THE SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE’S GUIDANCE
21st January 2020 Rahman Ravelli’s Aziz Rahman details the main points in the Serious Fraud Office’s just-published guidance on assessing the compliance programmes of companies under investigation.FREEZING CRYPTOASSETS
17th December 2019 Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli details the legal and practical issues affecting the freezing of virtual currencies.CARTEL BEHAVIOUR: DEFINING IT AND DEFENCES TO IT
13th December 2019 Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli defines cartel behaviour and outlines the relevant legislation.THE FINANCIAL CONDUCT AUTHORITY, THE WOODFORD DEBACLE AND RULE CHANGES
13th December 2019 Nicola Sharp of Rahman Ravelli considers the problems suffered by those who invested with NeilWoodford, criticism of the FCA’s approach to the crisis and the value of newFCA rules on liquidity.MULTI-AGENCY INVESTIGATIONS: HOW AGENCIES APPROACH THEM AND HOW THOSE INVESTIGATED SHOULD RESPOND
15th November 2019 Syedur Rahman of Rahman Ravelli details the issues involved when more than one agency investigates wrongdoing and explains how these should be assessed by thesubject of the investigation.WHAT THE FINANCIAL CONDUCT AUTHORITY GUIDANCE ON CRYPTOASSETS MEANS FOR THOSE IN THE MARKET
15th November 2019 The FCA’s Guidanceprovides clarity in the evolving cryptoassets market. Syedur Rahman of RahmanRavelli explains its implications.THE UK AND THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA – THE APPLICATION OF STRONG CUSTOMER AUTHENTICATION (SCA) UN
13th November 2019 Neil Williams ofRahman Ravelli explains the reasons behind the UK’s delayed implementation ofSCA and the effect it has on transactions that go beyond its borders.THE MAIN ASPECTS OF THE SANCTIONS AND ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING ACT
13th November 2019 Syedur Rahman ofRahman Ravelli outlines the powers and obligations created by the Act that areset to come into force when Brexit is completed.Parallel Proceedings – Civil And Criminal
30th September 2019Syedur Rahmanconsiders the factors that determine when civil proceedings can go ahead before,or at the same time as, criminal proceedings relating to the same circumstances.
Sfo Guidance, Privilege And Internal Investigations: Some Brief Advice For Corporates
2nd September 2019 Neil Williams outlines the legal situation regarding privileged material and the most recent SFO advice on corporate cooperation.Businesses, App Fraud And Recovering Losses
30th August 2019A new code of conductaims to give individuals greater protection against authorised push payment(APP) fraud. Syedur Rahman explains what the best available options are forbusinesses looking to recover such losses.
The Competition And Markets Authority: New Powers And The Need For Compliance
9th July 2019 With the Competition and Markets Authority set to gain greater powers, Rahman Ravelli’s Legal Director Nicola Sharp outlines the importance of compliance for both companies and their directors.The Fifth Money Laundering Directive And The Uk
17th June 2019 With the UK government’sconsultation period on the European Union’s Fifth Money Laundering Directive coming to an end, AzizRahman outlines the Directive's likely effect.The Right Way To Report A Company’s Failure To Prevent The Facilitation Of Tax Evasion
23rd May 2019 Self-reporting such a failure can be used as part of thecompany or partnership’s reasonable procedures defence if it is charged with anoffence. It can also be taken into account by prosecutors when making adecision about whether to prosecute and can be reflected in any penalties thatare imposedTaking The Right Steps To Ensure You Do Not Commit The Offence Of Failure To Prevent The Facilitatio
23rd May 2019 Nicola Sharp outlines what needs to be done to avoid thefailure to prevent offence that was introduced by the Criminal Finances Act.What General Counsel Need To Know About Money Laundering
11th April 2019WHAT GENERAL COUNSEL NEED TO KNOW ABOUT MONEY LAUNDERING
Nicola Sharp explains what money laundering is and outlineshow businesses can reduce the dangers it can pose.
Account Freezing Orders: Why We Can Expect More Of Them. A Practical Guide
10th April 2019With account freezing orders havingbeen used for the first time, Aziz Rahman of Rahman Ravelli examines theireffectiveness and considers why they may come to be used frequently
Unexplained Wealth Orders: Their Potential And The Right Way To Respond If Faced With One
21st March 2019Aziz Rahman considers why we may see an increase inunexplained wealth orders (UWO’s) and the implications for law enforcement and individuals.
Deferred Prosecution Agreements: The Best Option? Or A Flawed Idea?
28th February 2019Tescoadmitted wrongdoing over its accounting scandal in order to obtain a deferredprosecution agreement and avoid a conviction. But with everyone charged overthe scandal having been cleared, Aziz Rahman examines whether the deferredprosecution agreement process needs revising.
Deferred Prosecution Agreements: Obtaining One And Seeing It Through To Completion
28th February 2019With Standard Bank having become the first organisation to conclude a DPA, Aziz Rahman explains why gaining one is only the start of the challenge.
Dismissal At Nissan And Workplace Crime Prevention
17th January 2019The sacking of Nissan’s high-profile chairman may have beenproof that nobody is infallible. But Nicola Sharp argues that it should also beseen as an indicator that no company can be considered safe from wrongdoing.
Bribery Allegations In More Than One Jurisdiction: The Importance Of Ensuring A Joined-up Defence Ap
13th December 2018Aziz Rahman considers the Ericsson bribery investigation and outlines how best to respond if you are investigated by more than one law enforcement agency
Bribery And The Risk It Poses To Technology Companies
22nd November 2018With Microsoft’s activities in Hungary having come underinvestigation, Nicola Sharp explains why those at the cutting edge oftechnology need to be aware of the age-old dangers of bribery.
Obtaining A Dpa
4th October 2018With the SFO laying down tough conditions to those seeking adeferred prosecution agreement (DPA), Aziz Rahman examines what companies need todo to have a chance of securing one.
Dealing With Agencies That Investigate Business Crime
4th October 2018Aziz Rahman outlines the powers and functions of the Serious Fraud Office, Financial Conduct Authority and National Crime Agency and explains how defence teams should respond to them.
Conducting An Internal Investigation
4th October 2018Nicola Sharp and Syedur Rahman explain the value to companies of internal investigations and the importance of carrying them out correctly.
Preventing Money Laundering In The Gambling Industry
4th October 2018With a bookmaker being ordered to pay millions for failing to prevent money laundering, Nicola Sharp and Syedur Rahman examine how the gambling industry can tackle the problem.
Failing To Prevent Bribery
19th April 2018Following the first conviction of a company for failure toprevent bribery, Aziz Rahman considers the implications of the case for thosein business.
Money Laundering And The Gambling Industry
6th April 2018With a bookmaker being ordered to pay millions for failingto prevent money laundering, Nicola Sharp and Syedur Rahman examine how thegambling industry can tackle the problem.
How To Prevent Workplace Fraud
28th March 2018Aziz Rahman examines the scale of fraud in business andexplains how it can be prevented, identified and reported.
Politically Exposed Persons And The Legal Restrictions They Face
28th March 2018Aziz Rahman and Ben Ticehurst consider the Novartis scandaland the business restrictions on those holding high office.
Corporate Liability And The Individual
28th March 2018With much still to be decided regarding the prosecution ofindividuals over the financial scandals at Rolls-Royce and Tesco, Aziz Rahmanexamines how the fate of investigated companies can differ to that of those whoworked for them.
Defending Yourself When International Bribery Allegations Are Made
28th March 2018Syedur Rahman and Nicola Sharp explain how corporates shouldrespond if investigated over bribery allegations abroad.
Unexplained Wealth Orders
22nd February 2018With unexplained wealth orders now part of UK law, Aziz Rahman assesses their likely effect and how people should respond to them.
Vat And Dubai
22nd February 2018With Value Added Taxnow a part of business in Dubai, Aziz Rahman and Ben Ticehurst consider theprecautions that those in business must take.
How Executives Can Protect Themselves If A Company Collapses
22nd February 2018Syedur Rahman and Nicola Sharp take an overview of the Carillion crisis and explain how those who ran a failed company can defend themselves
Investment Fraud And Dishonesty
11th January 2018Aziz Rahman explains the latest legal test for dishonesty and its importance in investment fraud cases.
The Paradise Papers – Defending Tax Evasion Allegations
11th January 2018Aziz Rahman considers how anyone under investigation following the Paradise Papers leaks can mount the strongest possible defence.
What Accountants Must Do To Avoid Money Laundering Accusations
11th January 2018With the Treasury warning about accountants’ vulnerability to money laundering, Aziz Rahman examines what they can do to protectthemselves.
The Rise Of The Dpa
11th January 2018With deferred prosecution agreements (DPA’s) now part of theFrench, UK and US legal systems, Aziz Rahman explains their value – and how toobtain one.
Collusion And Competition Law
11th January 2018Syedur Rahman and Nicola Sharp look at the Financial ConductAuthority’s action to tackle alleged breaches of competition law.
Airbus And The Risks Of Bribery Across Borders
11th January 2018Syedur Rahman and Nicola Sharp examine the risks of bribery in international trade and how corporates should respond if they face such allegations.
The Need To Prevent Money Laundering – Everywhere
19th October 2017China is toughening its money laundering prevention by taking a closer look at many more business sectors. Aziz Rahman explains the thinking behind this – and what it means for everyone trading abroad.
Compliance After The Event In Bribery And Corruption Cases
19th October 2017Syedur Rahman and Nicola Sharp examine the merits of compliance committees and how improving your compliance measures can help you, even while you are under investigation, in global corruption cases.
Formula One, Bribery And The Serious Fraud Office
19th October 2017Aziz Rahman explains why the SFO’s enquiries into Formula One are relevant to all senior executives and corporates.
The Sfo, The Future And Securing A Dpa
19th October 2017Now that the SFO’s future appears assured, Aziz Rahman considers what this means for those seeking deferred prosecution agreements.
Health And Safety: The Corporate Implications
29th September 2017Syedur Rahman and Nicola Sharp consider how companies can minimise the problems that can be posed by health and safety prosecutions.
Automation And Money Laundering
29th September 2017Aziz Rahman explains how automation can bring its own risks of money laundering – and how they can be reduced.
Challenging Witness Credibility
29th September 2017The SFO has been criticised for its use of an expert witness in trials. Aziz Rahman examines how the SFO can be challenged over its use of such witnesses.
Managing The Problem Of Bribery In High-risk Countries
26th September 2017Aziz Rahman considers the corruption problems energy and resources companies have encountered and assesses how they can be minimised.
Increased Insolvency Powers
26th September 2017Ben Ticehurst explains the new powers at the Insolvency Service’s disposal – and what those in business need to do to ensure they do not fall foul of them.
Making Sure You Do Enough To Prevent Money Laundering
24th August 2017With money laundering coming under ever-closer scrutiny, Aziz Rahman explains why you need to make sure your preventative measures are good enough.
Frc Investigations
24th August 2017The Financial Reporting Council appears to be taking a tougher stance. Aziz Rahman explains what auditors must do to avoid falling fall of it.
The Serious Fraud Office: Ways To Deal With It
24th August 2017Aziz Rahman explains how to respond to a Serious Fraud Office (SFO) investigation in order to secure the best outcome.
Emissions Testing And Fraud
24th August 2017Porsche is the latest car maker to be investigated over emissions test fraud. Syedur Rahman and Nicola Sharp explain the wide-ranging effects of workplace fraud and the way to eradicate it.
The Dangers Of Cartels.
10th July 2017Syedur Rahman and Nicola Sharp consider two recent cartel cases and examine why businesses must take care not to become involved in such behaviour.
The Sfo And Section Two Interviews: Why Robust Defence Is Needed
10th July 2017Aziz Rahman explains why the SFO’s insistence that solicitors cannot be present for interviews under Section 2 of the Criminal Justice Act can be and should be challenged.
The Fourth Eu Anti-money Laundering Directive: What It Means For Business
5th July 2017With the Directive coming into effect, Aziz Rahman examines its implications.
The Huge Costs Of Bribery
5th July 2017Aziz Rahman looks at the case of Petrofac, explains how bribery can ruin a company and emphasises what must be done to prevent it.
Cross-border Investigations
5th July 2017The huge Petrobras bribery scandal has engulfed companies in many countries. Syedur Rahman and Nicola Sharp explain what needs to be done if your company is investigated in more than one country.
Corruption: How To Defend Yourself
5th July 2017Aziz Rahman outlines why allegations of corruption in football should act as a warning to everyone in business about the need to prevent wrongdoing.
Challenging Fca Accusations
13th June 2017Nicola Sharp and Syedur Rahman explain how changes to the way the FCA investigates cases will make it easier for companies and individuals to negotiate the best possible outcome.
Obtaining A Dpa
13th June 2017With deferred prosecution agreements (DPA’s) becoming more common, Aziz Rahman considers how a company under investigation can enhance its chances of obtaining one in order to avoid prosecution.
What The Criminal Finances Bill Means For Asset Seizure And Forfeiture
22nd May 2017Syedur Rahman and Nicola Sharp examine the changes likely when the Criminal Finances Bill becomes law.
The Policing And Crime Act 2017
22nd May 2017Aziz Rahman talks through the Act’s implications for those in business in the UK.
The Laundromat Saga: The Fca And Money Laundering Risks
22nd May 2017With banks being investigated over alleged Russian money laundering, Aziz Rahman examines the precautions financial professionals must take.
Tesco: A Question Of Corporate Criminal Liability?
22nd May 2017Aziz Rahman examines what the deferred prosecution agreement the supermarket giant has reached with the SFO may mean for other corporates.