header-logo header-logo

07 May 2024
Categories: Movers & Shakers , Profession
printer mail-detail

NLJ career profile: Satnam Tumani

Now a partner at Edmonds Marshall McMahon, Satnam Tumani has more than 30 years’ experience in fraud and corruption prosecutions, including 18 years at the Serious Fraud Office. He talks to NLJ about some particularly challenging cases, and his long-term 'unrealistic' plan to head for the mountains

What was your route into the profession?

I was an undergraduate at Brunel University, which operated a four-year ‘sandwich’ LLB. Unfortunately, my qualification coincided with a severe recession. Like many other law undergraduates, I found it impossible to secure a training contract. I took on a waiting job at a café bar in Tobacco Dock, Wapping. It was adjacent to News International and I found myself waiting on editors and senior journalists for over a year. Eventually, I saw an opportunity to be a short-term paralegal at the Serious Fraud Office (SFO). I started on a one-week contract to help a team that was supporting the SFO’s defence, in the Court of Appeal, of the convictions in the Guinness case. My contract was extended on a weekly then monthly basis, before I was finally made permanent.

Together with a friend (Karl Banister), we persuaded the then director of the SFO to make us the first two in-house SFO trainees. After qualification, I spent a year as a closely supervised junior lawyer at the SFO, followed by roles as an investigating lawyer, a case controller and then as an assistant director.

One of the great ironies of my SFO career was that I ended up becoming the case controller for the final appeals to the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court of the Guinness defendants, a full circle if ever there was one. In case you are wondering, Karl went on to great things, becoming a senior civil servant in the Government Legal Service at a young age. He is now director of operations, legal and clinical and deputy ombudsman at the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman.

What has been your biggest career challenge so far?

One of my earliest cases involved a fraud against more than 18,000 low-income victims. The investigating police force and I found it an incredibly challenging case. While the overall quantum of financial loss was relatively low, the impact on those low-income victims was high. The sheer numbers of victims inevitably led to presentation by spreadsheet in many aspects of the case. At the risk of being impertinent, my impression was that the relatively simply factual matrix did not set the pulse racing from the perspective of the judiciary, which resulted in drift and delay. The response of the system to restraint and confiscation, and the defendants’ flouting of deadlines, was conservative to such an extent that we faced an uphill task in securing financial redress for the victims. The remoteness of the loss seemed to encourage a systemic ‘this case can wait’ attitude in many segments of the criminal justice system. The police and I fought that lethargy and tried our best to repeatedly push the case and the public interest.

The challenge in keeping motivated in these circumstances is huge and I am sure that in many cases, prosecutors simply become resigned to cases disappearing into the ether. This leads to the risk of disillusionment at every level. In the end, victims can’t get meaningful answers from victim support officers, and they too become detached from a system that should support them every bit as much as it should support those accused of crime.

I’d like to think times have changed but, if anything, the dynamic has steadily got worse. There are increasing numbers of ‘orphan cases’, ie, cases that no one will take carriage of. If it were not for private prosecution, many of these cases would be left to wither entirely.

Which person within the legal profession inspires you most?

One of my great legal inspirations, Tony Shaw KC, has recently announced his retirement and so he seems a fitting candidate to talk about now. One of my early roles at the SFO involved me going to the Court of Appeal in 1995 to note the hearing of an appeal against conviction by a certain Mr Rozeik [1995] EWCA Crim J1006-6. Tony had taken over the conduct of the appeal at the last minute and together amd managed to persuade the court that the Crown and the trial judge had erred in understanding the circumstances in which a company could be deceived (where there was some evidence of complicity in the alleged crime from within the ranks of the company).

I (and indeed the court, given what they say about Tony in the judgment) was deeply impressed by the way in which Tony put the case, in particular given the paucity of time in which he had to prepare. Not long after Roziek, I encountered Tony again during the Butte Mining trial, one of the longest criminal trials in UK history. I played a minor part in that case but it meant my attendance at court, almost every day for over six months. I got to know Tony pretty well and when the chance finally came some years later, I managed to persuade him to prosecute a case for the SFO. Since then, he and I have worked on many other cases, both throughout my SFO career and also during my tenure at Kirkland.

Tony is incredibly clever, hard working and imaginative; he uses every conceivable computer aid to maximum effect; he is personable, a good team player and most importantly, he is respectful of everyone and their role. He treats the most junior staff member with the same level of respect he would afford a senior prosecutor or partner at a law firm.  

If you weren’t a lawyer, what would you choose as an alternate career?

From an early stage, I was determined to be a lawyer. The only other career I have ever wanted, in a totally unrealistic manner, was to be a ski instructor. Before my children were born, my wife and I would ski almost 30 days a year. Life in all of its many facets has caused an inevitable regression in the standard of my skiing. When I finally do retire, I will, knees permitting, commit to passing the relevant qualifications. In many Alpine resorts, part-time qualified skiers are used to support established ski schools during the peak holiday weeks. I had a fascinating ski lesson from a retired Italian architect last year. Maybe I’ll scratch the itch one day.

Who is your favourite fictional lawyer?

Tommy Mullaney from LA Law. For a period of time it was compulsive viewing.

How do you relax?

In the company of my wife and children. I ski at every chance I get. I love a road trip and love the process of planning one. I am also a keen photographer. Lastly, good food and wine, or a Negroni with friends and/or family.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll