Skip to content

All content is available under the Open Government Licence v3.0, except where otherwise stated.

To view this licence, visit:
https://nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3

or write to:
Information Policy Team,
The National Archives,
Kew,
London TW9 4DU

or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.

This publication is available at:
https://hmcpsi.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk.

© Crown copyright

SFO’s use of external counsel is fit for purpose, says HMCPSI

Published:

SFO’s watchdog says the fraud investigator has effective systems and processes in place when appointing external counsel but recommends SFO needs to adopt more rigorous oversight.

His Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Inspectorate (HMCPSI) has today [Thursday 30 April 2026] published a report following an inspection of the Serious Fraud Office’s (SFO) use of counsel at the pre-charge stage.

Counsel fees represent one of the SFO’s most significant costs and in 2024/25, SFO spent £7.6 million on counsel fees – 8.9% of net expenditure

Inspectors found that SFO has effective systems and processes to engage counsel on the right cases, and manage and control overall spend.

SFO staff demonstrated a clear understanding of the importance of maintaining sound financial controls as a key part of effective casework management.

Inspectors’ review of SFO cases identified that instruction of external counsel was appropriate, that a clear rationale for why counsel’s advice was provided on each case, and SFO considered costs and value for money.

More recently, SFO has introduced a central pool of legal advice provided by counsel to prevent duplication and paying for advice that has already been obtained.

However, HMCPSI identified areas of improvement that if adopted could help SFO improve performance.

Inspectors found that in some instances, counsel was instructed to address short-term internal resource pressures in the face of recruitment challenges.

A significant number of business cases lacked specific tasks for counsel to perform and where instructions were set out, these were inconsistent between different teams. This hampered SFO’s ability to demonstrate value for money.

SFO does not have a robust system to ensure a broad and diverse range of panel counsel are instructed, leading to case teams instructing the same, preferred counsel on a repeated basis.

And the SFO does not maintain any central record of counsel performance, which could support future decisions over which counsel to select.

His Majesty’s Chief Inspector of HMCPSI, Anthony Rogers, said:

“The SFO is a specialist investigating body that tackles complex and serious economic crime. It is vital SFO builds robust cases, and that is why they must show a strong grip on how much they are spending on external counsel, demonstrate value for money, and that counsel positively contributes to strong cases.

“Our inspection found that SFO is effectively appointing counsel and managing their input into cases. However, we make six recommendations that if successfully adopted, could improve their performance, deliver value for money for the public, while benefiting victims and reducing potential criminal activity from across the globe.”

Inspectors have made six recommendations for SFO to improve the consistency and grip on the use of counsel pre-charge:


• By August 2026, the SFO to issue guidance to staff confirming the specific detail to be included in business cases for the instruction of counsel.
• By August 2026, the SFO to amend their process for instructing counsel so that Heads of Division (HOD) provide the final authorisation of business cases and for any extensions
• By October 2026, the SFO to refresh and implement comprehensive and mandatory guidance for case teams when drafting instructions to counsel. The new process to be embedded by April 2027.
• By May 2026, the SFO to ensure that all business cases for the instruction of counsel are provided to the Finance team once approved.
• By October 2026, the SFO to introduce an assurance process, outside of the case team, to ensure that counsel instructions and fees are consistent with the approved business case for the use of counsel.
• By October 2026, the SFO to maintain a register of all counsel who have been instructed, to include any performance issues that have arisen, to be consulted prior to the completion of a business case for the instruction of counsel, to ensure that a wide range of counsel from their panel are instructed on their cases.

Susan Hawley, Executive Director of Spotlight on Corruption, said:

“Getting the use of external counsel right is critical to the success of SFO investigations – from getting rigorous independent review of its early casework, to ensuring parity of arms against those it decides to pursue for complex corruption and fraud. While the SFO’s progress in managing how it uses external counsel is very welcome, it is important the agency fully implements the review’s recommendations to ensure there is always a robust business case for external advice and to instruct a more diverse range of counsel.

“Ultimately, the use of external counsel must be accompanied by a concerted drive by the SFO with government support to attract top legal talent to the agency, and a review of how the SFO can tailor its workplace and salary packages to achieve this.”