Bowman v Fels

Bowman v Fels

Section 328 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 does not apply to the ordinary conduct of litigation by legal professionals, including all steps from issue to judgment, nor does it override legal professional privilege or the implied undertaking regarding documents disclosed in litigation. Parliament did not intend, absent clear language, to require lawyers to disclose suspicions arising in the course of legal proceedings to NCIS or to impede access to justice.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Jennifer Mary Bowman; Defendant/respondent: William John Fels
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Money Laundering, Legal Professional Privilege, Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, Disclosure Obligations, Access to Justice
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Human Rights Money Laundering Legal Professional Privilege Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 Disclosure Obligations Access to Justice

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 5 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jennifer Mary Bowman

Claimant/appellant

William John Fels

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does section 328 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 apply to the ordinary conduct of legal proceedings by legal professionals?
  2. 2 Does section 328 override legal professional privilege or the implied undertaking regarding documents disclosed in litigation?
  3. 3 Are lawyers obliged to disclose suspicions of money laundering arising in the course of litigation to NCIS?

Ratio Decidendi

Section 328 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 does not apply to the ordinary conduct of litigation by legal professionals, including all steps from issue to judgment, nor does it override legal professional privilege or the implied undertaking regarding documents disclosed in litigation. Parliament did not intend, absent clear language, to require lawyers to disclose suspicions arising in the course of legal proceedings to NCIS or to impede access to justice.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Order of Judge Cowell upheld
  • No order as to costs