Morgan, Regina (on the Application of) v Justices of Dyfed Powys Magistrates’ Court: Admn 18 Jun 2003

Money had been taken by the Police, but after the applicants had been acquitted, they sought it to be returned. Their action was struck out after long delays. They applied to the Magistrates who turned down the application.
Held: The money should be returned ‘ . . once it is clear that the claimant is entitled to possession of the money, then he must, within the terms of the 1897 Act, be treated as the person appearing to the court to be the owner thereof. It does not, of course, mean that he is necessarily the owner; and there is an opportunity for someone who claims to be the owner to take proceedings within six months against the person in possession of the property.’ The magistrates had been wrong to concentrate on possible but unproven misbehaviour, and the money should be returned.
[2003] EWHC 1568 (Admin)
Police (Property) Act 1897 1(1)
England and Wales
CitedMichael v Gowland 1977
The case stated procedure has a strict requirement that it be begun within 21 days. There is no discretion to extend that time limit. . .
CitedWebb v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police CA 26-Nov-1999
The Police had confiscated money suspected to be the proceeds of drug trafficking, but no offence was proved. The magistrates had refused to return the money under the 1897 Act. The claimants now sought to reciver it under civil proceedings.
CitedRegina (on the application of Chief Constable of Northamptonshire Police) v Daventry Justices 2001
Appeals against decisions by magistrates under the Act can be by way of application for judicial review. . .
CitedRegina (on the application of Carter) v Ipswich Magistrates’ Court Admn 2002
Mrs Carter had paid a man to murder someone. The man was an undercover police agent. In time Mrs Carter was convicted of soliciting to commit murder, but Mr Carter was acquitted. She disclaimed all interest in the money she had paid in favour of her . .
CitedCostello v Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary CA 22-Mar-2001
The police seized a car from Mr Costello, believing that it was stolen. The seizure was lawful at the time, by virtue of section 19 of PACE. The police never brought any criminal proceedings against Mr Costello, but they refused to return the car to . .
CitedRaymond Lyons and Co Ltd v Metropolitan Police Commissioner QBD 1975
A suspected thief had left a valuable ring with the claimant jewellers for valuation. They reported the matter to the police and handed the ring to them. The suspected thief never reappeared, and no-one claiming to be the true owner emerged. The . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 March 2021; Ref: scu.185612