1. Keith Wood has been instructed by:
a)A senior finance professional accused of systematic fraud

b)an individual arrested as a result of large scale money laundering and fraud allegations in connection with the supply of PPE during the pandemic.

2. Sean and James Reilly represented a vulnerable individual arrested as part of an organised crime group, accused of cultivating cannabis on an industrial scale.
He was represented by James Reilly (Higher Rights Advocate) who successfully argued that he was a victim of Modern Slavey, CPS offered no evidence and the case was dismissed.

3.Siobhain Egan:
a) acted for a UK Company Director accused of rape by a former partner of his, the client was advised to co-operate with police, he gave a detailed written statement, supported by photographs, copied all communications between them on social media and then a letter of strong representations was sent to police upon his behalf, which focused upon the weaknesses of the allegation. The Police and CPS recommended no further action.

b) represented a UK Company Director who had ordered a very rare men’s watch from the USA to the value of tens of thousands of pounds. The watch was misdescribed and hugely undervalued when posted from the US with the knowledge of the client.

It was seized at Border Control, who initially refused to return the watch stating that it would be confiscated, in response to the clients’ representations. After Siobhain was instructed she sent in a detailed application to review the initial determination by Border Control. It worked! The client was allowed the return of his very valuable watch upon payment of a relatively small fine.
It is extremely difficult to persuade Border Control to overrule their initial decision about confiscation, especially when dealing with items of such value but it shows that a determined and systematic approach can be effective.

The firm has a very successful practice when dealing with Border Control seizures of all sizes and acts for companies, High-Value Goods dealers and individuals alike.

C) represented a university student at one of the UK’s leading Universities who faced two separate complaints of rape made by two female students to the University Disciplinary Committee.

These are very serious allegations, and increasingly Universities find themselves dealing with them, particularly when the alleged victim refuses to go to the police with the allegation. The Universities follow their specific procedures which are rarely suitable for the trial of such sensitive and grave allegations, the complexity of the evidence , and forensic issues.

We have found that taking an assertive approach, based upon years of successful criminal defence experience, is often very effective in such situations, as in this case when after robust written legal submissions were made throughout, to the University, both allegations were discontinued against our client.

We have a very successful record when dealing with these type of University Disciplinary hearings, which are essentially civil regulatory trials of criminal allegations.

d) Represented a Director of a multi National Company, who was accused of domestic violence, witnessed by a third party who promptly reported the matter to the police and gave a statement. The arresting police officer also witnessed part of the incident.

As a result, the client was arrested and charged, the police did not at any stage speak to the alleged victim who was sitting the police station foyer at the time.

This is standard procedure in such cases, however, had they spoken to the alleged victim she would have told them at the earliest opportunity that it was she who attacked the client, when intoxicated, and that he was only acting in self Defence.

Strong written representations were made to the CPS who, eventually and reluctantly withdrew proceedings.

E) she is also currently advising –
1. A former Wealth fund manager, employed by one of the major European banks, suspected of systematic fraud, spanning decades, who is now the subject of a major investigation by that bank ;

2. A UK businessman whose business and personal accounts have been frozen by HMRC, who suspects that substantial cash payments Into both sets of accounts are the proceeds of crime ;

3.Another UK businessman, resident abroad, whose personal accounts and that of his family have been frozen, again by HMRC who suspect that the monies in each of these accounts are the proceeds of major tax fraud. The client and his property portfolio are now the subjects of a criminal investigation ;

4. A well established High-Value Goods dealer, whose business and personal accounts have been frozen because it is suspected that the proceeds of the sale of high-value goods received from a reputed Organised Crime Group, have been paid into his accounts.

5. A UK businessman resident abroad, who is the victim of a sophisticated long-running advance fee fraud, who has been defrauded of hundreds of thousands of pounds.
He wishes to peruse civil fraud recovery proceedings.