The High Court’s decision in Aabar Holdings SARL v Glencore plc highlights the challenges that arise when civil litigation and criminal enforcement proceedings concern the same underlying facts. The case, brought under Sections 90 and 90A of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, was due to become the first major shareholder securities claim of its type to be tried in England in October 2026. However, the court adjourned the civil trial until October 2028 because of substantial overlap with pending criminal proceedings scheduled for October 2027.
The court reaffirmed that there is no automatic rule requiring civil claims to be stayed pending criminal proceedings. Instead, it must balance competing interests and determine whether allowing the civil case to proceed would constitute a risk of injustice in the criminal process. In Aabar, the overlap of witnesses, evidence, disclosure issues and case management concerns were considered significant enough to justify postponing the civil trial.
When do overlaps civil and criminal proceedings overlap?
Overlaps between civil and criminal proceedings commonly occur where both proceedings require examination of the same factual allegations. Civil claims may focus on loss, causation and compensation, while criminal proceedings address culpability and punishment. As they centre on the same event, the evidence, documents and witnesses may be largely identical. The main difference in the cases is the different standards of proof.
Fraud cases frequently illustrate this tension. For example, a company may bring civil proceedings to recover misappropriated funds while the police or Crown Prosecution Service pursue criminal fraud charges against the same individuals. Similarly, directors accused of false accounting may face civil claims for breach of fiduciary duty or deceit alongside criminal prosecution. Regulatory investigations by bodies such as the FCA, HMRC or the Environment Agency can also run in parallel with civil litigation and criminal enforcement.
What are the consequences of overlaps between civil and criminal proceedings?
Disclosure obligations in civil proceedings may prejudice criminal investigations, witnesses may face competing demands and adverse findings in one forum can materially influence settlement negotiations and litigation strategy in another. Delays also increase costs, prolong uncertainty and create evidential difficulties as memories fade.
The principal lesson for practitioners is the need for early strategic planning. Where civil, regulatory and criminal exposure may arise from the same facts, decisions on disclosure, privilege, witness interviews, document preservation and public communications should be taken with a view to all potential proceedings, recognising that the sequencing of cases can be as important as their substantive merits.
At Dyne Solicitors, we specialise in both civil and criminal matters. For a no-obligation chat, please contact either Patrik Jones-Wright or Alex Sandland.