The court heard appeals against disclosure orders made under the 2002 Act. The appellants argued that neither the offence, nor the assets nor the appellants themselves were within the jurisdiction.
Citations:
[2010] EWCA Civ 907, [2010] 1 WLR 542, [2010] CP Rep 43, [2010] Lloyds Rep FC 606
Links:
Statutes:
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, 1990 Strasbourg Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Serious Organised Crime Agency v Perry and Others Admn 30-Jul-2009
The respondents sought to have set aside a world wide asset freezing and associated orders obtained by SOCA against them. They said that the Court had no jurisdiction over them, and that the Agency was guilty of wilful non-disclosure. They first . .
Cited by:
See Also – Perry and Others v Serious Organised Crime Agency CA 18-May-2011
The court was asked ‘Does a court in England and Wales have the power under Part 5 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 to make a recovery order in favour of the trustee for civil recovery in respect of recoverable property outside this jurisdiction, . .
Appeal from – Perry and Others v Serious Organised Crime Agency SC 25-Jul-2012
The first appellant had been convicted of substantial frauds in Israel. He appealed against world wide asset freezing (PFO) and disclosure (DO) orders made against him. Neither the appellant, nor his offences were connected with the UK. A bank . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.421116
