The defendant challenged the making of civil orders for recovery of what were alleged to be the proceeds of crime. They complained that no specific offence had been made out. The court was asked, as a preliminary issue: ‘Whether a claim for civil recovery can be determined on the basis of conduct in relation to property without the identification of any particular unlawful conduct, this first question to include whether the claimant can sustain a case for civil recovery in circumstances where a respondent has no identifiable lawful income to warrant the lifestyle and purchases of that respondent.’
Held: A claim for civil recovery could not be made solely on the basis that the defendant had no explanation of how he supported his lifestyle. The Director did have to set out the matters which he alleged constituted the particular kind of unlawful activity by which the property had been obtained. However, it was not enough simply to allege that the property was the product of some kind of unlawful conduct.
Judges:
Sullivan J
Citations:
[2005] EWHC 3168 (Admin), Times 27-Feb-2006
Links:
Statutes:
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 Part 5
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Distinguished – Muneka v Customs and Excise Admn 2-Feb-2005
The Albanian claimant was found at Heathrow Airport with a ticket to Tirana and with over andpound;20,000 in cash in his baggage. The district judge held that the cash had been obtained through unlawful conduct and that it was therefore recoverable . .
Cited by:
Cited – Assets Recovery Agency v Olupitan and Another QBD 8-Feb-2007
The claimant was responsible for recovering money under the 2002 Act, and alleged that the first defendant had been engaged in a mortgage fraud.
Held: To succeed in such a claim for recovery the Claimant must prove, ‘on a balance of . .
Cited – Wiese v The UK Border Agency Admn 29-Jun-2012
The claimant challenged a decision to seize a sustantial sum of cash being carried by him whilst passing through London City Airport. In the magistrates court, the claimant had objected to the reliance on parts of a customs officer’s statement which . .
Cited – Olupitan and Another v Director of the Assets Recovery Agency CA 22-Feb-2008
The claimant challenged seizure of cash he was carrying. The court had concluded from its volume that it represented the proceeds of crime.
Held: Carnwath LJ said: ‘I agree with Sullivan J (in Green) that the Director need not allege the . .
Cited – Assets Recovery Agency v Szepietowski and others CA 24-Jul-2007
The defendant had had set aside an interim order for assets recovery. The director appealed against a finding by the court below that he did not have ‘a good arguable case’, justifying an interim recovery order.
Held: The appeal succeeded. On . .
Cited – Wiese v The UK Border Agency Admn 29-Jun-2012
The claimant challenged a decision to seize a sustantial sum of cash being carried by him whilst passing through London City Airport. In the magistrates court, the claimant had objected to the reliance on parts of a customs officer’s statement which . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.238418
