Undertaking a comprehensive, thorough and timely investigation has many advantages. It enables the organisation to identify precisely what has happened and who and what is involved. This means that steps can be taken to prevent further loss or damage occurring, to identify wrongdoers, to recover misappropriated funds or other assets, to protect customers, to manage reputational issues, to deal effectively with insurers and to undertake an early assessment of the organisation’s liability. Put simply, it gives the organisation the information it needs to put itself on the front foot in terms of damage limitation, mitigation of loss and remediation. In regulated sectors, it enables the organisation to deal proactively with regulators and to demonstrate robust governance.

An investigation report, and the material gathered during the course of an investigation, can however be a double edged sword. Unless the report is protected by legal or litigation privilege, the report itself and documents produced during the investigation process might be disclosable in litigation or in the course of a criminal or regulatory investigation or prosecution. That means claimants, prosecutors and regulators might be able to gain access to the company’s confidential report and documentation. If the report, or material gathered through the investigation process, contains damaging information, this could seriously hamper the organisation’s ability to defend its position.

Where legal or litigation privilege applies, documents are protected from disclosure. Legal advice privilege applies to confidential communications passing between lawyer and client for the purposes of giving and receiving legal advice. Litigation privilege applies to communications passing between lawyers, clients and third parties where litigation is underway or is reasonably contemplated, and where the dominant purpose of the communication is the litigation. Where other professionals, consultants or employees are charged with undertaking an internal investigation, privilege will not apply and any report and documents prepared as part of the investigation process may be disclosable.

Privilege is therefore an important benefit. It enables clients who are facing potential litigation or prosecution to deal openly and transparently with their lawyers without the risk that their communications will have to be disclosed if litigation is actually commenced or if a prosecution is brought.

The concept of legal and litigation privilege in Jersey and Guernsey closely follows the English law concept. In a recent case in England involving the Serious Fraud Office (SFO), the English High Court caused considerable concern with a decision which appeared to narrow dramatically the scope of privilege in relation to internal investigations. The SFO had sought access to various documents which had been created by lawyers and accountants retained by a company undertaking an internal investigation into allegations of corruption and fraud in its overseas operations.

The company claimed the documents were protected by privilege as they were created in the course of an investigation in circumstances where a criminal prosecution was reasonably contemplated. The High Court disagreed, essentially finding that the documents had been created at too early a point in time when it could not properly be said that a prosecution was reasonably contemplated. The Court therefore ordered that the majority of the documents sought by the SFO were not protected from disclosure at all.

The company appealed. The Court of Appeal overturned the High Court’s decision finding that even though the internal investigation was commenced well before the SFO had launched its own investigation, there was a clear possibility at that early stage that criminal proceedings might be brought and the company had therefore commenced its own investigation for the dominant purpose of protecting its position in those proceedings. The company’s claim for privilege was therefore upheld.

The Court of Appeal’s decision is important. It has affirmed the protection afforded by litigation privilege in the context of internal investigations. It is critical, however, that early legal advice is obtained where an internal investigation is contemplated to ensure that material produced during the investigation and the report itself is properly protected and that the investigation itself does not become a hostage to fortune.




Guernsey, Jersey

Twitter LinkedIn Email Save as PDF
More Publications
1 Dec 2020 |

Reflections from the Virtual Fund Finance Symposium

The Fund Finance Association’s Virtual Symposium took place from 16th to 20th November. Attendees ...

27 Nov 2020 |

NAV Facilities: A Promising Vaccine for Funds in the Era of Covid-19?

The spotlight has been on NAV facilities and other bespoke financings as an area poised for growth, ...

30 Oct 2020 |

When Worlds Collide – How COVID is Connecting Technology with Natural Resources

Dating back to the beginning of 2020, the natural resources sector has been extremely active at both...

13 Aug 2020 |

Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (SPACS) make a comeback

In this global article on SPACs we revisit the basics, then look to each of our key jurisdictions fo...

23 Jul 2020 |

Guernsey approves new discrimination legislation – but the battle continues…

There was much celebration accompanying the approval by the States of Guernsey to introduce discrimi...

20 Jul 2020 |

Listing quoted Eurobonds on The International Stock Exchange

The International Stock Exchange (TISE or the Exchange) provides recognised facilities for the listi...

Contributors: Chris Smedley
30 Jun 2020 |

"Lockdown" or "Time to Break Free"?

Arguably one of the greatest strengths of the human race is our ability to adapt. Few people in our ...

Contributors: Richard Field