Ahmet v Tatum & Anor [2023] EWHC 1492 (Ch) (23 May 2023)

Ahmet v Tatum & Anor [2023] EWHC 1492 (Ch) (23 May 2023)

The claim was struck out as an abuse of process because Parliament has provided a complete and exhaustive code under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 for the resolution of disputed property rights in the context of restraint and confiscation orders, and the claimant has full opportunity to assert her interests in the Crown Court. Parallel proceedings in the High Court are not permitted.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 1492 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Senel Ahmet; First Defendant: David Tatum; Second Defendant: The Crown Prosecution Service
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 May 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil (property, Trusts and Probate) / Application to Strike Out Claim
Outcome
Claim struck out as abuse of process
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Jurisdiction, Beneficial Interest, Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, Confiscation Proceedings, Restraint Orders
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Property Law Abuse of Process Jurisdiction Beneficial Interest Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 Confiscation Proceedings +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Senel Ahmet

Claimant

David Tatum

First Defendant

The Crown Prosecution Service

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (property, Trusts and Probate) / Application to Strike Out Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to determine beneficial interests in property subject to restraint and confiscation proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002
  2. 2 Whether the claimant's civil claim constitutes an abuse of process given the statutory scheme

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was struck out as an abuse of process because Parliament has provided a complete and exhaustive code under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 for the resolution of disputed property rights in the context of restraint and confiscation orders, and the claimant has full opportunity to assert her interests in the Crown Court. Parallel proceedings in the High Court are not permitted.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out as abuse of process

Orders

  • The claim is struck out.