Assets Recovery Agency v Jackson & Ors [2007] EWHC 2553 (QB) (09 November 2007)

Assets Recovery Agency v Jackson & Ors [2007] EWHC 2553 (QB) (09 November 2007)

The Claimant has established on the balance of probabilities that the assets in question are recoverable property, having been obtained through unlawful conduct, namely drug trafficking and money laundering, as evidenced by the Respondent's criminal history, the high frequency of heroin contamination on seized cash, the lack of any credible legitimate source of income, and the implausibility of the Respondent's explanations. The Respondent failed to provide documentary or credible evidence of legitimate business activity sufficient to account for the acquisition of the assets. The court is satisfied that the statutory requirements for a recovery order under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002...

Citation
[2007] EWHC 2553 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Director of the Assets Recovery Agency; 1st Respondent: Fabian Fernando Al Kurt Jackson; 2nd Respondent: Cheryl Davina Smith
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 November 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Recovery Proceedings / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed; recovery order granted.
Legal Topics
Asset Forfeiture, Unlawful Conduct, Money Laundering, Drug Trafficking, Mortgage Fraud, Hearsay Evidence, Burden of Proof
Proceeds of Crime Civil Law Criminal Law Asset Forfeiture Unlawful Conduct Money Laundering Drug Trafficking Mortgage Fraud +2 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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 16
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Director of the Assets Recovery Agency

Claimant

Fabian Fernando Al Kurt Jackson

1st Respondent

Cheryl Davina Smith

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Recovery Proceedings / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the assets identified are 'recoverable property' under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002
  2. 2 Whether the Claimant has proved on the balance of probabilities that the property was obtained through unlawful conduct
  3. 3 Whether the Respondent's explanation of legitimate business activity is credible and supported by evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant has established on the balance of probabilities that the assets in question are recoverable property, having been obtained through unlawful conduct, namely drug trafficking and money laundering, as evidenced by the Respondent's criminal history, the high frequency of heroin contamination on seized cash, the lack of any credible legitimate source of income, and the implausibility of the Respondent's explanations. The Respondent failed to provide documentary or credible evidence of legitimate business activity sufficient to account for the acquisition of the assets. The court is satisfied that the statutory requirements for a recovery order under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002...

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; recovery order granted.

Orders

  • Recovery order made in favour of the Director of the Assets Recovery Agency in respect of the identified assets: four real properties, jewellery and watches, cash, three motor vehicles, and six bank accounts.
  • The assets are to be vested in the Trustee for Civil Recovery under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.