Assets Recovery Agency, R (on the application of) v He & Anor [2004] EWHC 3021 (Admin) (07 December 2004)

Assets Recovery Agency, R (on the application of) v He & Anor [2004] EWHC 3021 (Admin) (07 December 2004)

Proceedings under Part 5 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 are civil, not criminal, and the standard of proof is the balance of probabilities. The evidence required must be cogent, but the criminal standard does not apply. The interim receiving order is justified on the evidence presented, and there is no incompatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights. There is no abuse of process or retrospectivity in the application of the Act to the facts of this case.

Citation
[2004] EWHC 3021 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Director of the Assets Recovery Agency; First Respondent: Jia Jin He; Second Respondent: Dan Dan Chen
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 December 2004
Procedural Posture
Application for Variation/discharge of Interim Receiving Order Under Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 Part 5 / Hearing Before High Court (administrative Court) on Application to Vary or Discharge Interim Receiving Order
Outcome
Application to discharge interim receiving order refused; interim receiving order to continue.
Legal Topics
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 Part 5, Civil Recovery of Proceeds of Crime, Standard of Proof in Civil Asset Recovery, Application of ECHR to Asset Recovery, Abuse of Process, Retrospectivity and Article 7 ECHR
Civil Procedure Asset Forfeiture Human Rights Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 Part 5 Civil Recovery of Proceeds of Crime Standard of Proof in Civil Asset Recovery Application of ECHR to Asset Recovery Abuse of Process +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 4 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Director of the Assets Recovery Agency

Claimant

Jia Jin He

First Respondent

Dan Dan Chen

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Variation/discharge of Interim Receiving Order Under Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 Part 5 / Hearing Before High Court (administrative Court) on Application to Vary or Discharge Interim Receiving Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proceedings under Part 5 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 are civil or criminal in nature
  2. 2 What standard of proof applies to civil recovery proceedings under Part 5
  3. 3 Whether the interim receiving order should be discharged or varied on the facts

Ratio Decidendi

Proceedings under Part 5 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 are civil, not criminal, and the standard of proof is the balance of probabilities. The evidence required must be cogent, but the criminal standard does not apply. The interim receiving order is justified on the evidence presented, and there is no incompatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights. There is no abuse of process or retrospectivity in the application of the Act to the facts of this case.

Court Disposition

Application to discharge interim receiving order refused; interim receiving order to continue.

Orders

  • Interim receiving order remains in force; no discharge or variation granted.