R (on the application of KBR, Inc) (Appellant) v Director of the Serious Fraud Office (Respondent)

In this case, the Supreme Court considered the extra-territorial effect of section 2(3) of the Criminal Justice Act 1987. KBR, Inc, a US company, sought to quash a notice issued by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) under section 2(3) of the 1987 Act, which required the production of material held abroad. KBR, Inc argued that section 2(3) of the 1987 Act does not have extra-territorial effect and that the SFO had no jurisdiction to issue the notice. The Supreme Court held that section 2(3) of the 1987 Act does not have extra-territorial effect, and the SFO did not have the jurisdiction to issue the notice. The Court found that the presumption against extra-territorial effect applies to the 1987 Act, and there was no clear indication in the language, purpose, or context of the legislation that Parliament intended to confer on the SFO the power to compel a foreign company to produce documents held abroad. The Court also considered the legislative history of the 1987 Act and subsequent legislation, which supported the view that Parliament did not intend for the 1987 Act to have extra-territorial effect. The Supreme Court concluded that section 2(3) of the 1987 Act was not intended to confer a power to require disclosure by a foreign person abroad, and the appeal was allowed.