10-Defendant VAT Fraud Case Abandoned: Success for Carson Kaye and Libertas Chambers Defence Team banner

Insights

Home / Insights / News / 10-Defendant VAT Fraud Case Abandoned: Success for Carson Kaye and Libertas Chambers Defence Team

10-Defendant VAT Fraud Case Abandoned: Success for Carson Kaye and Libertas Chambers Defence Team

  • Posted on

This case involved a complex 10-handed criminal conspiracy in which several directors of a film production company were charged with defrauding the government of over £13 million in value-added tax (VAT). The scheme allegedly included a network of fictitious companies that issued false invoices, which facilitated the laundering of funds through accounts controlled by the network and third-party intermediaries. The money was then allegedly funnelled back to the film production company.

Our client, who served as the Accounts Manager, was implicated by the Crown as playing a central role in the conspiracy. It was alleged that he was deeply involved in the VAT fraud by facilitating misdirected payments, misrepresenting the nature of funds to auditors, and processing fraudulent invoices. Furthermore, it was claimed that our client received payments into his personal bank account from individuals connected to the fraud. Despite these allegations, our client consistently denied any knowledge or involvement in the conspiracy.

The case required extensive preparation, with over 40,000 pages of material served by the prosecution and an additional 1,000,000+ pages of unused material to review. The trial was scheduled for several months at Southwark Crown Court, with Carson Kaye instructing two counsel from Libertas Chambers, Ayaz Qazi KC and Jonathan Page. Due to the volume and complexity of the disclosure, the defence faced significant challenges in preparing for trial. The Crown continued to serve additional material even after the jury had been sworn in, leading to several weeks of delays in the trial to allow the defence time to review the new information.

Despite the challenges, the defence team worked diligently, engaging in extensive back-and-forth discussions with the prosecution. Under significant pressure, the prosecution ultimately made the decision to offer no evidence against all the defendants. This marked a remarkable and favourable outcome for all parties involved, especially given the fact that the prosecution's investigation had lasted over a decade.

The case's resolution was a testament to the thorough preparation and commitment of the defence team, and the decision to offer no evidence after such a long investigation was a resounding success for the defendants.