CRR Case Summaries and Entity-specific Press Notices
The FRC publishes, on a quarterly basis, summaries of its findings from recently closed reviews that resulted in a substantive question to a company (‘Case Summaries’). In addition, it publishes the names of companies whose reviews were closed in the previous quarter without the need for a substantive question. No Case Summary is prepared for such reviews.
Case Summaries, which are available for cases closed in the quarter ending March 2021 onwards, are included in the table below. As, currently, the FRC is subject to existing legal restrictions on disclosing confidential information received from a company, the Case Summaries can only be disclosed with the company's consent. Where consent has been withheld by the company, that fact is disclosed in the table.
From March 2018 until March 2021, the FRC published the names of companies whose reviews were closed in the previous quarter but did not prepare Case Summaries. However, on an exceptional basis, specific cases may be publicised through entity-specific Press Notices, which can also be found in the table below.
The FRC’s reviews are based solely on the company’s annual report and accounts (or interim reports) and do not benefit from detailed knowledge of the company’s business or an understanding of the underlying transactions entered into. They are, however, conducted by staff of the FRC who have an understanding of the relevant legal and accounting framework. The FRC’s correspondence with the company provides no assurance that the annual report and accounts (or interim reports) are correct in all material respects; the FRC’s role is not to verify the information provided but to consider compliance with reporting requirements. The FRC’s correspondence is written on the basis that the FRC (which includes the FRC’s officers, employees and agents) accepts no liability for reliance on its letters or Case Summaries by the company or any third party, including but not limited to investors and shareholders.
Key
- Only a certain number of CRR’s reviews result in substantive questioning of the Board. Matters raised may cover questions of recognition, measurement and/or disclosure.
- CRR’s routine reviews of companies’ annual reports and accounts generally cover all parts over which the FRC has statutory powers (that is, strategic reports, directors’ reports and financial statements). Similarly, CRR’s routine reviews of companies’ interim reports will generally cover all information in that document. Limited scope reviews arise for a number of reasons, including those conducted when a company’s annual report and accounts or interim report are selected for thematic review or reviews that have been prompted by a complaint. In accordance with the FRC's Operating Procedures, for Corporate Reporting Review, CRR does not identify those companies whose reviews were prompted by a complaint.
- The FRC may ask a company to refer to its exchanges with CRR when the company makes a change to a significant aspect of its annual report and accounts or interim report in response to a review.
- Case closed after 1 January 2021 but performed under operating procedures that did not allow for the publication of Case Summaries.
- From the quarter ended June 2023, the FRC started identifying the auditor of the annual report and accounts, or the audit firm that issued a review report on the interim report, that was the subject of the CRR review. This information was also back-dated for closed cases publicised from the quarter ended September 2022. Cases marked N/A relate to those published prior to September 2022 or interim reviews that did not have a review opinion.’
Cases
CRR Case Summaries and Entity-specific Press Notices (Excel version)
| Entity | SkinBioTherapeutics plc |
|---|---|
| Balance Sheet Date | 30 June 2025 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | Yes |
| Scope of Review (2) | Limited |
| Quarter Published | September 2026 |
| Auditor (5) | Gravita Audit II Limited |
| Case Summary / Press Notice |
We asked the company to explain the basis for its presentation of operating segment information by geography, which seemed inconsistent with the focus on products and services in the strategic report. The company confirmed that it will present operating segment information based on products and services in its future annual reports and accounts. We also queried the absence of any disclosures relating to major customers, as there appeared to be at least one customer from whom the company had recognised revenue in excess of 10% of the total revenue for the period, and noted that other disaggregation of total revenue may provide useful information. The company agreed to include the required disclosure of revenue from major customers and a disaggregation of revenue by type. The matters raised in our enquiry were under internal review by the company at the time that we opened our correspondence, as disclosed in the company’s interim report to 31 December 2025. |
| Entity | Smiths News plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 30 August 2025 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | No |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | September 2026 |
| Auditor (5) | BDO LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice | N/A |
| Entity | Softcat plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 31 July 2025 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | No |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | September 2026 |
| Auditor (5) | Ernst & Young LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice | N/A |
| Entity | SSP Group plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 30 September 2025 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | Yes |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | September 2026 |
| Auditor (5) | KPMG LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice |
Previously capitalised IT transformation costs The company disclosed that it had reassessed the accounting treatment of IT transformation costs that had been capitalised as intangible assets in previous years and concluded that they should not have been capitalised. We asked the company to explain the basis on which the correction was recognised as an expense in the current year, rather than as an adjustment to prior periods in accordance with IAS 8, ‘Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors’. The company explained that it had concluded that the effect of recognising the expense in the current year was not material and set out the basis for this decision. We closed our enquiry but encouraged the company, should a similar situation arise in the future, to consider whether clearer disclosure of the judgements made in determining how an error is corrected might be material for a user’s understanding. |
| Entity | St. James's Place plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 31 December 2025 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | No |
| Scope of Review (2) | Limited |
| Quarter Published | September 2026 |
| Auditor (5) | PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice | N/A |
| Entity | TheWorks.co.uk Plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 4 May 2025 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | Yes |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | September 2026 |
| Auditor (5) | Kreston Reeves LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice |
Impairment reversals We asked the company to explain the events and circumstances which led to the reversal of impairment charges previously recognised against the group’s right of use assets and the parent company’s investment in subsidiary. The company satisfactorily explained the basis for these reversals and agreed to disclose this information, where relevant, in future sets of accounts. Leases We asked the company to explain the accounting for significant lease modifications during the year, the circumstances which led to the modifications and the extent of judgement involved. The company acknowledged certain inconsistencies in the presentation of renewals and modifications in the notes to the accounts. The company agreed to address these inconsistencies and to clarify accounting policy disclosures in future sets of accounts. Investment in subsidiary The calculations used to determine the investment in subsidiary’s value in use were disclosed as a key source of estimation uncertainty. We asked the company to provide a sensitivity analysis or range of reasonably possible outcomes as this information had not been disclosed. The company satisfactorily provided this analysis and agreed to disclose such information, where relevant, in future sets of accounts. We also asked the company to clarify the discount rate and cash flows used in the value in use calculations, due to apparent inconsistencies in the disclosures in the accounts. The company satisfactorily explained the assumptions used and agreed to clarify future disclosures in this area. |
| Entity | Travis Perkins plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 31 December 2025 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | No |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | September 2026 |
| Auditor (5) | Deloitte LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice | N/A |
| Entity | Victrex plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 30 September 2025 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | Yes |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | September 2026 |
| Auditor (5) | PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice |
Statement of cash flows We asked the company to explain the nature of amounts owed by group undertakings and the basis for classifying them as cash flows from operating activities in its parent company Statement of Cash Flows. The company explained the related balances and acknowledged that the cash flows should have been presented within investing activities. However, the company also noted that it intended to adopt FRS 101, ‘Reduced Disclosure Framework’, for its 2026 parent company accounts and, therefore, would not be presenting this primary statement in future periods. We closed our enquiry on this basis. |
| Entity | Airtel Africa plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 31 March 2025 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | Yes |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | June 2026 |
| Auditor (5) | Deloitte LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice |
Deferred tax in respect of hyperinflationary adjustments to non-monetary assets We asked the company for information about the accounting treatment applied to deferred tax arising from hyperinflationary adjustments to non-monetary assets. The company provided a satisfactory response. Balance held in wallets We requested further information about the nature of, and accounting treatment applied to, amounts described as ‘balance held in wallets’, including the rationale for any distinctions between this item and the amounts described as ‘balance held under mobile money trust’. The company provided this information and clarified that the amounts described as ‘balance held in wallets’ relate solely to the group’s own funds in electronic wallets and are not connected to mobile money customer wallets. |
| Entity | Angling Direct PLC |
| Balance Sheet Date | 31 January 2025 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | Yes |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | June 2026 |
| Auditor (5) | Price Bailey LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice |
Impairment testing of goodwill We queried the company’s allocation of goodwill to cash generating units (CGUs) for the purposes of impairment testing under IAS 36, ‘Impairment of Assets’. The company clarified the CGUs to which goodwill had been allocated, and how these related to its operating segments, and agreed to provide clearer disclosures about this matter in its 2026 financial statements. Impairment testing of property, plant and equipment, other intangible assets and right-of-use assets We asked the company to clarify whether any e-commerce revenue, together with associated costs, had been allocated to individual store CGUs for the purpose of assessing those stores for impairment. The company provided a satisfactory response. We also requested information about how non-store CGUs were assessed for indications of impairment. The company responded satisfactorily and agreed to enhance future disclosures explaining how assets, other than UK store assets, are assessed for impairment. |
| Entity | Applied Nutrition plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 31 July 2025 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | No |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | June 2026 |
| Auditor (5) | BDO LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice | N/A |
| Entity | Ashmore Group plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 30 June 2025 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | No |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | June 2026 |
| Auditor (5) | Ernst & Young LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice | N/A |
| Entity | Aviva Plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 31 December 2025 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | No |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | June 2026 |
| Auditor (5) | Ernst & Young LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice | N/A |
| Entity | Avon Technologies plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 30 September 2025 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | No |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | June 2026 |
| Auditor (5) | KPMG LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice | N/A |
| Entity | Barratt Redrow plc |
| Balance Sheet Date | 29 June 2025 |
| Exchange of Substantive Letters (1) | No |
| Scope of Review (2) | Full |
| Quarter Published | June 2026 |
| Auditor (5) | Deloitte LLP |
| Case Summary / Press Notice | N/A |