• Home
  • About Us
  • Join Libertas
  • Contact Us
+44 (0) 20 7036 0200
Shortlist 0
Libertas Chambers Logo
  • Expertise
  • Members
  • Clerks
  • Media
Menu
Home
Our Expertise
Business CrimeCriminal DefenceRegulatory LawCivil LitigationPublic Law & Human RightsPrivate ProsecutionsInternational Criminal Law
Our People
MembersClerks
About Us
Direct Public AccessEquality, Diversity & Corporate Social ResponsibilityInstructing Us & Terms of BusinessPro BonoPrivacy Policy & GDPR
Media Hub
Join Libertas
Contact Us
+44 (0) 20 7036 0200
Dr Felicity Gerry KC writes for Law360
  1. Home
  2. Media Hub
  3. Dr Felicity Gerry KC Writes For Law360

Dr Felicity Gerry KC writes for Law360

Corruption in the oil industry and compliance with ISO37001

Published: 7th August 2023

Dr Felicity Gerry KC writes for Law360 on corruption in the oil industry and compliance with ISO37001.

You can access the full article (subscription) here  https://www.law360.com/articles/1705224/oil-industry-must-brush-up-on-int-l-anti-bribery-standard

Related Articles
Successful Defence in Multi-Million Pound VAT Fraud Case involving the Film Industry Libertas Chambers Secures Successful Defence in Multi-Million Pound VAT Fraud Case involving the Film Industry Three of our silks and three of our senior juniors represented the lead defendants in this trial at Southwark, which followed a ten year investigation by HMRC. We represented the CEO and key employees of this London based multi-Oscar winning company. This was a complex case involving sub-contracting in film industry both in the UK and overseas. Our barristers mounted a comprehensive attack upon the disclosure system in this prosecution, which consisted of millions of documents. This involved detailed analysis and criticism of the handling of documentary and digital material. We also uncovered wholesale failures to comply with HMRC internal procedures in relation to the distinction between civil and criminal investigations, and the consequences that flow in relation to PACE rights and abuse of process. The trial was opened to the jury 6 weeks ago and they were then sent away whilst these issues were litigated. The prosecution offered no evidence today, 14th March 2025. This outcome underscores Libertas Chambers’ commitment to providing outstanding legal representation and defending our clients fearlessly with skill, precision, and integrity, in the most challenging and high-stakes cases. Our team continues to set a standard of excellence in corporate and financial crime litigation, and we are very pleased to have successfully safeguarded the interests of our clients in this significant case. Our barristers worked as formidable teams with the expert assistance and preparation of the solicitors listed below. We thank them for their instructions. Their skill, experience and expertise was an indispensable and integral part of the successful outcome. Simon Csoka KC and Roxanne Morrell acted for the CEO, and were instructed originally by Tony Barnfather and then Simon Morgan (Sherrards.) Felicity Gerry KC and Matthew Lawson acted for the Head of Accounts, and were instructed by Zeeshan Khan (Rahman Ravelli.) Ayaz Qazi KC and Jonathan Page acted for the Accounting Manager, and were instructed by John Kaye (Carson Kaye.) For further information, please contact our clerking team
Libertas Chambers
Caroline Goodwin KC Secures Acquittal in £5M Pension Fraud Trial Caroline Goodwin KC was instructed by Farleys Solicitors senior partner Paul Schofield, to act for a principal defendant, who was a company director and trustee. The charge was conspiracy to defraud, along with 8 other defendants. The allegation centred around a complex large-scale pension fraud in excess of £5m. The fraud was said to include the alleged unlawful liberation of pension funds via a series of sham loans and payments from overseas accounts. The investigation took five years, with many aspects of financial and HMRC regulatory provision needing to be considered. After a 9-month trial at Newcastle Crown Court, and 20 days of jury deliberation, Farleys’ Client was acquitted. Paul Schofield of Farleys commented: “There is one person who got the result. Caroline has been exceptional and a pleasure to work with.”
Libertas Chambers
Dirty Money? Case Study: World Uyghur Congress v National Crime Agency By Alexandra-Maria Eugenicos, Criminal Defence Barrister, Libertas Chambers.   Abstract   A consideration of World Uyghur Congress v National Crime Agency [2024] EWCA Civ 715. The fact that there might not be sufficient evidence to justify use of powers under POCA at time of importation, should not preclude the launch of an investigation. This judgment has also changed the interpretation of money laundering offences under POCA with real impact across many professions, including the Bar. Introduction The appeal in the case of WORLD UYGHUR CONGRESS v NATIONAL CRIME AGENCY [2024] EWCA Civ 715 relates to whether the National Crime Agency (‘NCA’) had misdirected itself in law in one or more material respects when reaching the decision: Not to investigate alleged offences under Part 7 POCA 2002; Not to commence a civil recovery investigation under Part 5 POCA in respect of certain cotton products brought into the UK and monies derived from or connected to purchase. These issues were considered in the lower court where a claim for judicial review was brought by the World Uyghur Congress against three law enforcement agencies including the NCA. This was focused on challenging the decision not to carry out investigations into whether consignments of cotton goods originating from the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of China (‘XUAR’) was a product of forced labour. It was submitted that the authorities should have investigated whether these items imported into the UK were the product of forced labour or other human rights abuses perpetrated by the People’s Republic of China. The general approach was re-iterated that rarely will the courts involve themselves in decisions as to whether to prosecute; caselaw confirms that only in exceptional cases would the court interfere with a prosecutor’s decision-making. However, it is of note that the law does not render a decision-maker’s powers unfettered – and it was emphasised that those tasked with decisions must direct themselves correctly in law. Context It was not in dispute that there is a growing body of diverse and substantial evidence confirming serious human rights abuses occurring in the XUAR cotton industry on a large scale. There is clear and widespread exploitation including forced labour which accounts for a significant proportion of all cotton originating from China. It was undisputed that 85% of cotton grown in China comes from the XUAR. Parties agreed that products derived from forced labour anywhere in the world can amount to criminal property for the purposes of money-laundering offences under Part 7 or recoverable property for purposes of civil recovery under Part 5. As a result, funds from sale of such products – and any property into which those funds are put – could also be criminal or recoverable property. The appellant had gathered extensive evidence raising ongoing concerns in relation of importation of cotton products originating from XUAR where forced labour and human rights abuses are widespread within that industry. These were provided to the authorities with the aim of persuading them to act. Ground of Appeal The Appellant’s main complaint was that the NCA should have been actively investigating and thereby prohibiting importation of goods originating from the XUAR using powers under s. 1 Foreign Prison-Made Goods Act 1897 and s. 139 Customs and Excise Management Act 1979. Moreover, the NCA should also have started a POCA investigation on basis that cotton goods originating from XUAR (or proceeds) could be criminal property. Discussion The court concluded that the fact that there might not be sufficient evidence to justify use of powers under POCA at time of importation, should not preclude the launch of an investigation. The opposite notion would suggest that the NCA, police and other investigative bodies would not investigate overseas criminality being imported to the UK in absence of concrete evidence of specific crimes perpetrated by particular people. The Court of Appeal also held that it was wrong in law to suggest that criminal liability for money laundering or civil recovery is removed where the proceeds have passed through several hands in a business context where adequate consideration is paid. There should also be distinction between a bona fide purchaser and one who suspects that this is the product of servitude. Appeal allowed. Wider Application This judgment has already impacted the interpretation of money laundering offences under POCA. This is directly applicable to a barrister in practice who may receive payment for fees knowing or suspecting that those funds are derived from criminal property. This would mean that they are in possession of criminal property even if adequate consideration is given. To avoid any exposure to criminal liability, the Bar Council strongly recommends that those who find themselves in such a position carefully consider whether they should make a Defence Against Money Laundering disclosure to the National Crime Agency. They have provided further guidance on this issue in a practice note – Practice note on Rex (on the application of World Uyghur Congress) v the National Crime Agency [2024] EWCA Civ 715.
Libertas Chambers
Author
Libertas Chambers
Contributors
Felicity Gerry
CONNECT WITH US FOR THE LATEST NEWS & UPDATES
XLinkedInLibertas Lens
Libertas Chambers Logo
  • Diversity & CSR
  • Privacy
  • Site Terms
  • Cookies
  • Site Data Policy
  • Complaints
Join Our Newsletter
© Copyright Libertas Chambers 2025 | Regulated by the Bar Standards Board | Site by Orca Online - Digital Marketing Sussex

Libertas-chambers-website-popup

×

Libertas-chambers-website-popup

×