ENGLAND & WALES Law and Practice Contributed by: John Kaye and Piers Desser, Carson Kaye
4.2 Due Process and Bail Financial crime cases in England and Wales typi - cally take significantly longer to prosecute than most mainstream criminal offences. This is primarily due to their complexity and evidential volume, including large-scale disclosure exercises involving millions of documents, digital device extractions, and structured disclosure reviews under the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996. Cases often also involve forensic accounting, expert evidence and cross-border elements, requiring mutual legal assistance or evidence gathering from multiple jurisdictions, which can substantially extend timelines. Defendants may be either released on bail or remand - ed in custody between charge and trial. Bail is com - mon in white-collar cases, often with stringent con - ditions such as surrender of passports, reporting requirements and financial restrictions. However, custody is more likely where there is a per - ceived risk of absconding, interference with witness - es, or obstruction, particularly in high-value fraud or international cases. Courts apply custody time limits (CTLs) under the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 and related regula - tions, which set statutory maximum periods (typically 182 days in the Crown Court from first appearance to start of trial, subject to extension). Prosecutors must actively manage cases to avoid CTL expiry and extensions require judicial approval based Individuals facing financial crime charges may be eligi - ble for publicly funded legal representation under the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO), although availability is increasingly limited in complex fraud cases. Eligibility is subject to a means test (assessment of income, capital and household resources) and a mer - its test, which considers whether it is in the interests of justice for funding to be granted. on “good and sufficient cause”. 4.3 Public or State Funding
Sanctions include unlimited fines, imprisonment for individuals, enforcement undertakings, remediation orders and civil damages claims. Enforcement is typically regulatory and administrative first, with escalation to criminal prosecution for seri - ous or deliberate breaches. 4. Prosecution and Trial Process 4.1 Initiating a Prosecution In England and Wales, financial crime prosecutions may be initiated in several ways depending on the complexity and seriousness of the conduct. In less serious cases, proceedings can be commenced by summons or postal requisition, typically issued by prosecutors such as the CPS, regulatory bodies, or local authorities. More commonly in serious financial crime, proceed - ings begin following charge after arrest or voluntary interview under caution, often as part of a long inves - tigative process led by the SFO or specialist CPS divi - sions. The decision to prosecute is made by the relevant prosecuting authority. The CPS applies the Full Code Test, requiring (i) a realistic prospect of conviction and (ii) that prosecution is in the public interest. The SFO applies broadly equivalent principles under the Code for Crown Prosecutors, though it retains a distinct mandate for complex fraud, bribery, and cor - ruption cases, including the use of Section 2, CJA 1987, powers to compel information. Prosecutors have discretion to charge companies, individuals, or both and may pursue corporate enti - ties where the “directing mind and will” test or statu - tory attribution permits, or where specific corporate offences apply (eg, failure to prevent bribery or fraud). The prosecution decision is governed by the Code for Crown Prosecutors, the SFO Operational Handbook, and broader constitutional principles of prosecutorial independence, evidential sufficiency, and proportion - ality.
52 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook