Robert Tchenguiz is considering augmenting his claim against the Serious Fraud Office with an allegation of misfeasance in public office.
Lawyers representing Robert Tchenguiz’s interests told Eder J at a case management conference that, in the light of disclosure which has been given to date in the ongoing action, they consider that the documents support a claim of misfeasance in public office against the SFO.
Such a move would require permission from the judge to amend the claim, and the potential impact that would have on the trial timetable is expected to be discussed today.
Robert Tchenguiz’s interests also seek permission to disclose certain documents to independent criminal counsel in order to receive advice on the prospects of a criminal prosecution against the SFO or accountancy firm Grant Thornton.
However, that issue will be heard separately at a later date.
In a statement, Robert Tchenguiz said: “It is increasingly likely that I am a victim of misfeasance in public office at the SFO and, potentially, criminality on the part of the SFO and Grant Thornton. We have today notified the Court of our desire to explore these avenues in greater depth and are considering our options.”
Last month, the Court of Appeal upheld Eder J’s ruling ordering a partner and a director at Grant Thornton to hand over documents said to be central to the £300m action brought by Vincent and Robert Tchenguiz against the Serious Fraud Office.
Tomlinson LJ rejected the argument advanced by Stephen Akers and Mark McDonald – in their capacity as joint liquidators of Oscatello Investments Limited and related companies – that five key reports were subject to legal privilege and should not be disclosed.
Setting out the background to the dispute, Tomlinson LJ said: “In these proceedings Robert and Vincent Tchenguiz and companies and trusts associated with them through which their business is conducted seek damages from the director of the Serious Fraud Office.
“As is well known, in March 2011 Robert Tchenguiz and Vincent Tchenguiz were arrested at their homes and search warrants were executed both at their residences and at business premises of the associated companies.
“They say that the searches, arrests and investigations and the publicity surrounding them had a disastrous effect on their business interests, causing extensive financial losses and reputational harm.”
The trial of the Tchenguiz brothers’ action against the SFO is currently due to be heard in October 2014.
