P v P (Ancillary Relief: Proceeds of Crime): FD 8 Oct 2003

The parties sought guidance from the court on the circumstances which arose in ancillary relief proceedings where a legal representative came to believe that one party might be holding the proceeds of crime. In the course of ancillary relief proceedings, the parties legal representatives concluded that some part of the matrimonial assets might represent the proceeds of crime. If they succeeded in obtaining part of the assets for their client they would commit an offence. They disclosed their concerns but were refused permission to disclose their own disclosure.
Held: The representatives had a duty to disclose their concerns to the authorities, but if it was necessary to disclose the tip off for the proceedings and it formed no part of any criminal purpose, they could disclose the tipping off to the other party. The Act envisaged permission to a party to make authorised disclosures. The ambit of the Act was wider than for earlier provisions, and might affect many proceedings. Negotiations could be affected just as much as any actual transfer. The Act makes no distinction between degrees of criminal property. An illegally obtained sum of andpound;10 is no less susceptible to the definition of ‘criminal property’ than a sum of andpound;1million.
Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss
[2003] EWHC 2260 (Fam), Times 14-Oct-2003, Gazette 16-Oct-2003, [2004] Fam 1
Bailii
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 333(4)
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v Cox and Railton 1884
(Court for Crown Cases Reserved) The defendants were charged with conspiracy to defraud a judgment creditor of the fruits of a judgment by dishonestly backdating a dissolution of their partnership to a date prior to a bill of sale given by Railton . .
CitedRegina v Central Criminal Court ex parte Francis and Francis HL 1989
The police had obtained an ex parte order for the production of files from a firm of solicitors relating to financial transactions of one of their clients. The police believed that the client had been provided with money to purchase property by an . .
CitedBank of Scotland v A Ltd and Others (Serious Fraud Office, Interested Party) CA 6-Feb-2001
A bank, having been informed that the activities of a customer involved money laundering, found itself in a position where, if it paid out the funds, it would face conviction, but if it failed to do so, it be found to be involved in tipping off the . .
CitedJenkins v Livesey (formerly Jenkins) HL 1985
The parties had negotiated through solicitors a compromise of ancillary relief claims on their divorce. They agreed that the house should be transferred to the wife in consideration of her release of all other financial claims. The wife however . .
CitedBank of Scotland v A Ltd and Others (Serious Fraud Office, Interested Party) CA 6-Feb-2001
A bank, having been informed that the activities of a customer involved money laundering, found itself in a position where, if it paid out the funds, it would face conviction, but if it failed to do so, it be found to be involved in tipping off the . .
CitedAllan v Clibbery (1) CA 30-Jan-2002
Save in cases involving children and ancillary and other situations requiring it, cases in the family division were not inherently private. The appellant failed to obtain an order that details of an action under the section should not be disclosed . .
CitedC v S and Others (Money Laundering: Discovery of Documents) CA 3-Oct-1998
The money laundering regulations create a conflict between private rights and criminal provisions, particularly the restriction on information which might prejudice an investigation may be under way. Conflicts were resolved by guidance from NCIS. . .

Cited by:
CitedBowman v Fels (Bar Council and Others intervening) CA 8-Mar-2005
The parties had lived together in a house owned in the defendant’s name and in which she claimed an interest. The claimant’s solicitors notified NCIS that they thought the defendant had acted illegally in setting off against his VAT liability the . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 May 2021; Ref: scu.186717