Our Principles
How we work is inseparable from what we find.
Investigative value depends on disciplined methods, proportionate scope and conclusions that the evidence supports. These principles govern the engagement, not just the final report.
Meet with an expertLawful methods.
Applicable law is assessed in the jurisdictions relevant to the work. A Brazilian legal framework is not assumed to authorize activity elsewhere.
We do not offer unauthorized access to bank accounts, private communications or restricted systems. Any source or method must be lawful for the intended purpose and scope.
Explicit scope.
The engagement identifies the questions, relevant parties, jurisdictions, source boundaries, permitted contacts and intended use. New questions or additional jurisdictions may require a revised mandate.
We state what the work can and cannot establish. A limitation is not omitted because it makes the commercial conclusion less convenient.
Independent conclusions.
Our task is not to confirm a preferred narrative. We consider corroborating and contradictory information, identify alternative explanations and distinguish facts from inference.
An absence of adverse information does not establish that a party or transaction is safe. We use findings that reflect the evidence rather than unsupported approval labels.
Confidentiality without case publicity.
Client identities, private documents and investigative findings are not public marketing material. Confidentiality arrangements and appropriate channels are established before sensitive documents are shared.
The public website does not publish private cases or actual investigated counterparties. Its report sample is fictional and clearly identified as such.
Source traceability.
Reporting records where material findings came from, their relevant dates and their limitations. A derivative database result is not silently presented as an original official record.
Where evidence is intended for legal use, preservation, translation and jurisdiction-specific requirements should be agreed with counsel. Admissibility is not automatic.
Respect for counsel’s client relationship.
Counsel-facing engagements do not authorize contact with the underlying client by default. Contact permissions, recipients and reporting protocols are agreed explicitly.
No cross-selling and no use of a confidential matter to compete for counsel’s client. The investigative role remains distinct from legal advice and representation.
Professional responsibility.
The firm’s partners lead scope, contextual analysis and reporting. The quality of a report depends on judgment, not on a volume of automated results.
We decline work that cannot be conducted within appropriate legal, ethical or evidentiary boundaries. We do not promise a predetermined finding, asset recovery or elimination of risk.
Before you take exposure, understand what can be verified.
A confidential conversation about the questions, the scope and the next step.