Balancing Justice: When Criminal Investigations Meet Civil Claims
In this pivotal episode of P.I. Case Note, Michelle Wright explores the Federal Court of Australia’s nuanced decision in Keystone Asset Management Limited (Receivers and Managers Appointed) (in liquidation) v Filippini [2025] FCA 604, which addresses one of the most challenging dilemmas in litigation: how to balance a defendant’s fundamental right against self-incrimination with the prejudice suffered by plaintiffs when civil proceedings are delayed due to potential criminal charges. The case involved allegations of $158 million in dishonest misappropriation through false invoicing, with ASIC conducting parallel criminal investigations.
The court’s innovative approach demonstrates that there is often a middle ground between completely staying civil proceedings and forcing defendants to compromise their criminal defense. By allowing certain procedural steps to continue—such as filing defenses with dispensations, conducting discovery, and preparing evidence in draft form—the court protected both the defendants’ accusatorial rights and the investors’ legitimate interests in recovering their losses. This decision, alongside the similar Queensland Court of Appeal ruling in Zeus Tech v Ebert, establishes important precedents for managing concurrent civil and criminal proceedings across various contexts, from corporate fraud to workplace safety breaches and serious motor vehicle accidents.
Listen for Michelle Wright’s expert analysis of this significant procedural decision and its implications for personal injury law. If you’re facing complex litigation involving potential criminal charges—whether from a serious road accident, workplace incident, or other circumstances—the experienced team at accident legal understands how to navigate these parallel proceedings while protecting your rights. Contact us for a free consultation to discuss your situation and ensure your interests are properly safeguarded.
