Our policy on making information about our cases public
In this section you can find information about many of our cases.
We try to provide as much information as we can without compromising law enforcement work, prejudicing the right of defendants to a fair trial, or causing avoidable reputational damage or harm to individuals or businesses under investigation. In practice the amount of information we can provide, particularly about cases which are in the investigation stage, is usually very limited.
Before the Director decides whether to open an investigation, the SFO does not normally confirm or deny interest in allegations made against either companies or individuals. If asked, we would normally say no more than that we are aware of the situation and that we are monitoring it.
Once the Director has formally opened a criminal investigation, the position will change in the following circumstances:
(a) the company under investigation itself makes the information public. This normally happens when a publicly listed company is informed of our investigation and considers this fact to be market-sensitive information of which it must inform the market. In such cases the SFO will (usually in co-ordination with the company’s lawyers) confirm the fact and focus of the investigation after the market has been informed, or
(b) there are operational reasons for announcing the investigation (such as a call for witnesses). Or,
(c) there is some other substantial reason why the announcement of the investigation would be in the public interest.
SFO investigations follow the evidence, and their focus or scope often changes as the investigation advances. In these circumstances we will not normally update these pages, which should be regarded simply as a record of our statements at the time they were issued. The investigation may have changed in material ways.
Once an investigation results in a decision to prosecute and a company or an individual is charged with an offence, we announce the relevant name and charges. This may happen at the time the individual or company appears in court in answer to a requisition.
This policy is intended for guidance only. We apply it on a case by case basis in light of all relevant circumstances.
If you are a victim or a witness in one of our cases, we will contact you at relevant times as the case progresses. For more information, see the general information for victims, witnesses and whistleblowers.
- Airbus Group
- Airline Services Limited
- Amec Foster Wheeler PLC
- Axiom Legal Financing Fund
- Balli Group
- Birmingham Mortgage Fraud
- Bombardier Inc
- Capita Oak Pension and Henley Retirement Benefit schemes and Trafalgar Multi Asset Fund
- Chemring Group PLC and Chemring Technology Solutions Ltd
- David Vidgeon
- ENRC Ltd
- Ethical Forestry Limited
- Gavin Woodhouse and associates
- Glencore group of companies
- Global Forestry Investments
- GPT Special Project Management Ltd
- Graham Marchment
- Gupta Family Group Alliance (GFG)
- Güralp Systems Ltd
- Harlequin Group
- Izodia Plc: Gerald Smith
- Patisserie Holdings PLC
- Petrofac Ltd.
- Pinnacle Angelgate, North Point Pall Mall and New Chinatown
- Quindell PLC (now Watchstone PLC)
- Raedex Consortium
- Rio Tinto group
- Rolls-Royce PLC
- Saunders Electrical Wholesalers Ltd
- Secure Trade & Title Ltd
- Securency PTY Ltd
- Smartalk Ltd
- Solar Energy Savings Ltd
- Speciality Steels
- Tresaderns & Partners SL, Price Stone Group SL and Anderson McCormack SL (Gooding, Rumsey, Emery, Morris, Hughes, Farmer and Coleman)
- Tresaderns & Partners SL, Price Stone Group SL and Anderson McCormack SL (R v Jeffrey Revell-Reade, Anthony May and John Robert Manning)
- No Entries