Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) v Azam & Ors

Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) v Azam & Ors

Both applications to vary the property freezing order are refused because the court is satisfied Azam has not provided full and frank disclosure of his assets, has deliberately failed to disclose the BDL account, and likely has other undisclosed assets from which legal expenses can be met. The bills submitted by Saunders are not sufficiently explained to justify the sums claimed as reasonable legal expenses.

Parties
Claimant: Serious Organised Crime Agency; First Respondent: Amir Azam; Interested Party: Saunders Law Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Recovery Proceedings / Ruling on Applications to Vary Property Freezing Order
Outcome
Applications dismissed
Legal Topics
Property Freezing Order, Legal Expenses, Asset Disclosure, Civil Recovery Order
Proceeds of Crime Civil Procedure Property Freezing Order Legal Expenses Asset Disclosure Civil Recovery Order

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 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Serious Organised Crime Agency

Claimant

Amir Azam

First Respondent

Saunders Law Ltd

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Recovery Proceedings / Ruling on Applications to Vary Property Freezing Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the property freezing order should be varied to exclude funds for past and future legal expenses
  2. 2 Whether the respondent has undisclosed assets outside the scope of the property freezing order

Ratio Decidendi

Both applications to vary the property freezing order are refused because the court is satisfied Azam has not provided full and frank disclosure of his assets, has deliberately failed to disclose the BDL account, and likely has other undisclosed assets from which legal expenses can be met. The bills submitted by Saunders are not sufficiently explained to justify the sums claimed as reasonable legal expenses.

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed

Orders

  • Both applications to vary the property freezing order are dismissed with costs to be assessed in the absence of agreement.