The Commercial Court rejected the UK anti-fraud agency’s application to appeal two recent decisions in the long-running ENRC litigation.
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has been involved in the long-running dispute by the Kazakh mining firm Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation (ENRC) after it launched an investigation into it over alleged bribery and corruption back in 2013.
This lengthy case that has the SFO and law firm Dechert and a former partner Neil Gerrard listed as defendants has been in the courts for several years.
To fully understand the case, City A.M., has it outlined on how this litigation came about, with a spotlight on Gerrard.
The case has been to several hearings. Mr Justice Waksman handed down his first decision back in May 2022, which stated that ex-lawyer Gerrard had breached his duties and that SFO officials had acted “recklessly” and engaged in “bad faith opportunism” by accepting leaked documents from the former ENRC lawyer.
In a recent decision, the same judge found that the SFO would not have commenced the criminal investigation into ENRC but for Gerrard’s breaches of his legal duties. He found that SFO’s wrongdoings had a “sufficiently causal connection” to ENRC’s losses stemming from the agency’s probe and the law firm’s Dechert internal investigation.
The SFO has agreed to make an interim payment to ENRC legal costs and losses to the company pre-2013, which was £9m. This payment is standard practice, and if the SFO are successful in its appeal, these costs will be repaid.
The parties are currently at a consequential hearing which started on Monday, and is set to finish on Wednesday. The SFO applied to the Commercial Court on Monday for permission to appeal, however, on today, the court refused the application.
Commenting on the decision, the SFO spokesperson said: “We are disappointed by the Commercial Court’s ruling and will now apply directly to the Court of Appeal for permission to appeal.”
The SFO has until the 19 April to file their appellant notice.
Commenting on the decision, Dr Helen Taylor, senior legal researcher at Spotlight on Corruption, said: “It’s disappointing the SFO hasn’t been given an early green light to appeal a devastating ruling that would not only leave the taxpayer with a massive bill, but also send a chilling message to law enforcement about the risks of looking into dodgy dealings by big corporates and deep-pocketed elites.”
“The significant public interest in this case means the SFO should persevere with its appeal, to ensure that the threat of crippling costs for minor missteps doesn’t hold back the agency’s ambition to pursue the toughest cases,” she added.
