Contingent matters	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2016
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Contingent matters	Contingent matters On June 19, 2008, a lawsuit captioned Del Valle Gurria S.C. v. Servicio Pan Americano de Protección, S.A. de C.V. was filed with the Twenty-third Civil Judge in the Federal District in Mexico (the “Court”) against Servicio Pan American de Proteccion, S.A. de C.V. (SERPAPROSA), the Mexico subsidiary that we acquired in November 2010. The plaintiff claims it is owed legal fees and corresponding value-added tax (VAT), interest and expenses related to its legal representation of SERPAPROSA in connection with tax audits covering the 1991, 1992 and 1994 fiscal years. On October 28, 2010, the Court issued a decision in favor of SERPAPROSA in part and the plaintiff in part, ordering SERPAPROSA to pay the plaintiff less than $1 million for its previous representation of SERPAPROSA. Between November 2010 and October 2013, the judgment was subject to multiple appeals by both parties to the Fifth Civil Court of Appeal of the Federal District in Mexico (the “Fifth Civil Court of Appeal”) and to the First Civil Collegiate Tribunal of the First Circuit in Mexico (the “First Civil Collegiate Tribunal”), and was remanded twice to the Court for determination of the fees to be paid to the plaintiff. On December 6, 2013, the Fifth Civil Court of Appeal issued a decision in favor of the plaintiff, modifying the lower court’s ruling and ordering SERPAPROSA to pay the plaintiff approximately $7 million plus VAT and interest for its previous representation of SERPAPROSA. SERPAPROSA filed a constitutional injunction on January 20, 2014 with the First Civil Collegiate Tribunal. The appeal was granted in favor of SERPAPROSA on September 17, 2014, ordering SERPAPROSA to pay approximately $2 million plus VAT and interest. The plaintiff filed an appeal on October 7, 2014, with the Mexico Supreme Court, which was rejected by the court on October 22, 2014. The plaintiff filed two subsequent actions appealing the Supreme Court’s October 22, 2014 decision, one before the First Appellate Court in Civil Matters of the First Circuit (the “Appellate Court”) and one with the Mexico Supreme Court. The action filed before the Appellate Court was rejected on February 16, 2015. The action filed with the Mexico Supreme Court was rejected on October 15, 2016. During the fourth quarter of 2015, we became aware of an investigation initiated by COFECE (the Mexican antitrust agency) related to potential anti-competitive practices among competitors in the cash logistics industry in Mexico (the industry in which Brink’s Mexican subsidiary, SERPAPROSA, is active). Because no legal proceedings have been initiated against SERPAPROSA, we cannot estimate the probability of loss or any range of estimate of possible loss at this time. It is possible that SERPAPROSA could become the subject of legal or administrative claims or proceedings, however, that could result in a loss that could be material to the Company’s results in a future period. In addition, we are involved in various other lawsuits and claims in the ordinary course of business. We are not able to estimate the loss or range of losses for some of these matters. We have recorded accruals for losses that are considered probable and reasonably estimable. Except as otherwise noted, we do not believe that the ultimate disposition of any of the lawsuits currently pending against the Company should have a material adverse effect on our liquidity, financial position or results of operations.

Contingent matters

On June 19, 2008, a lawsuit captioned Del Valle Gurria S.C. v. Servicio Pan Americano de Protección, S.A. de C.V. was filed with the Twenty-third Civil Judge in the Federal District in Mexico (the “Court”) against Servicio Pan American de Proteccion, S.A. de C.V. (SERPAPROSA), the Mexico subsidiary that we acquired in November 2010. The plaintiff claims it is owed legal fees and corresponding value-added tax (VAT), interest and expenses related to its legal representation of SERPAPROSA in connection with tax audits covering the 1991, 1992 and 1994 fiscal years. On October 28, 2010, the Court issued a decision in favor of SERPAPROSA in part and the plaintiff in part, ordering SERPAPROSA to pay the plaintiff less than $1 million for its previous representation of SERPAPROSA. Between November 2010 and October 2013, the judgment was subject to multiple appeals by both parties to the Fifth Civil Court of Appeal of the Federal District in Mexico (the “Fifth Civil Court of Appeal”) and to the First Civil Collegiate Tribunal of the First Circuit in Mexico (the “First Civil Collegiate Tribunal”), and was remanded twice to the Court for determination of the fees to be paid to the plaintiff. On December 6, 2013, the Fifth Civil Court of Appeal issued a decision in favor of the plaintiff, modifying the lower court’s ruling and ordering SERPAPROSA to pay the plaintiff approximately $7 million plus VAT and interest for its previous representation of SERPAPROSA. SERPAPROSA filed a constitutional injunction on January 20, 2014 with the First Civil Collegiate Tribunal. The appeal was granted in favor of SERPAPROSA on September 17, 2014, ordering SERPAPROSA to pay approximately $2 million plus VAT and interest. The plaintiff filed an appeal on October 7, 2014, with the Mexico Supreme Court, which was rejected by the court on October 22, 2014. The plaintiff filed two subsequent actions appealing the Supreme Court’s October 22, 2014 decision, one before the First Appellate Court in Civil Matters of the First Circuit (the “Appellate Court”) and one with the Mexico Supreme Court. The action filed before the Appellate Court was rejected on February 16, 2015. The action filed with the Mexico Supreme Court was rejected on October 15, 2016.

During the fourth quarter of 2015, we became aware of an investigation initiated by COFECE (the Mexican antitrust agency) related to potential anti-competitive practices among competitors in the cash logistics industry in Mexico (the industry in which Brink’s Mexican subsidiary, SERPAPROSA, is active). Because no legal proceedings have been initiated against SERPAPROSA, we cannot estimate the probability of loss or any range of estimate of possible loss at this time. It is possible that SERPAPROSA could become the subject of legal or administrative claims or proceedings, however, that could result in a loss that could be material to the Company’s results in a future period.

In addition, we are involved in various other lawsuits and claims in the ordinary course of business. We are not able to estimate the loss or range of losses for some of these matters. We have recorded accruals for losses that are considered probable and reasonably estimable. Except as otherwise noted, we do not believe that the ultimate disposition of any of the lawsuits currently pending against the Company should have a material adverse effect on our liquidity, financial position or results of operations.