Under external legal direction · offices in Madrid and Alicante
When an indication appears (a whistleblowing report, an accounting mismatch, an employee’s warning), the company has a brief window to find out what happened before someone else does. That window is worth a great deal.
In brief. It allows the real scope to be known, the conduct stopped, the evidence preserved, a data-based decision on cooperating or defending, and diligence to be proven. At trial, the question will not only be what happened, but what the company did when it learned. And the decisive, least understood argument: only the investigation directed by an external lawyer is protected by professional privilege.
When an indication appears, a report with concrete data in the channel, an unexplained accounting mismatch, a bank alert, a client’s warning, the company has a brief window to learn what happened before anyone else. That window allows the real scope to be known, the conduct to be cut short, the evidence to be preserved, a decision with data on whether to cooperate with the authority or to defend, and diligence to be accredited. Because at trial the question will not only be what happened, but what the company did when it knew.
Not every indication merits a formal investigation, and opening them lightly wears the organisation down and creates a documentary trail that can later turn against it. It opens where indications look solid and the matter may have criminal, regulatory or reputational relevance. And one rule we do not negotiate: we report what there is, not what the company wants to hear. An internal investigation designed to exculpate whoever commissions it protects nobody: the prosecution detects it and it worsens the company’s position.
| Step | Action | Guarantee | The key point |
|---|---|---|---|
| Triage | Assessment of the indication | Confidentiality | Not every alert merits a formal file |
| Plan | Scope, custodians and measures | Proportionality | Documented from the outset |
| Preservation | Forensic imaging | Chain of custody | Before anyone touches anything |
| Analysis | E-discovery and accounting | Data protection | Limited to what is necessary |
| Interviews | Informed and voluntary | No coercion | Threat of dismissal contaminates |
| Report | Findings and options | Privilege (external) | What there is, not what pleases |
| Decision | Sanction, cooperate or defend | Strategic | With data, not blind |
| Aftermath | Controls corrected | Diligence proven | What the company did when it knew |
Each investigation is designed to its facts; this sequence is indicative.
The decisive and worst-understood argument: where the investigation is directed by an external lawyer, both the report and the associated communications are covered by professional privilege and cannot be seized in an eventual search of the company. Where the internal department conducts it, they are not: that report, with all its conclusions, doubts and drafts, is company documentation and can end up in the accusation’s hands as the best evidence against it. It is the difference between knowing what happened and deciding calmly, or knowing it together with whoever will accuse you.
Independence completes the case: the prosecution weighs an investigation credible on its face, and one designed to exculpate is detected and backfires. Our reports state what there is, are built on evidence obtained within the limits, and leave the company with three real options on the table.
Channel reports, mismatches and warnings: triage and investigation proportionate to the indication.
Governing bodies commissioning independent investigations: privilege, independence and a report that withstands scrutiny.
Compliance functions needing external legal direction: guarantees, data protection and usable evidence.
Employees under internal investigation: their rights, the limits of access and the validity of what is obtained.
Speak to a criminal lawyer
Criminal defence in English before the courts of Alicante and the rest of Spain, for residents and for visitors who have flown home.
Société de Conseil Juridique et Expert es un despacho de abogados con sedes en Madrid, Alicante, Londres y París, especializado en defensa y acusación penal, delitos económicos y corporativos y derecho tecnológico. Trabajamos con orientación estratégica en procedimientos penales complejos, propiedad intelectual y análisis forense avanzado, y prestamos consultoría jurídica, compliance y escudos de protección a particulares y empresas. Atendemos desde Alicante y Madrid, con consulta online en toda España y asistencia al detenido 24 horas. Resuelva sus dudas en las preguntas frecuentes o solicite una primera consulta.
Copyright © 2026 Société de Conseil Juridique et Expert S.L.
