Mills & Anor, R (on the application of) v Sussex Police & Anor [2014] EWHC 2523 (Admin) (25 July 2014)

Mills & Anor, R (on the application of) v Sussex Police & Anor [2014] EWHC 2523 (Admin) (25 July 2014)

The warrant was unlawfully issued due to material non-disclosure by the police in their application. The judge might well have refused to issue the warrant had there been full and proper disclosure, particularly given the claimants' history of cooperation. The correct legal test is whether the undisclosed information might reasonably have led the judge to refuse the warrant, not whether the judge would definitely have refused it.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 2523 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: David Mills; Claimant: Alison Mills; First Defendant: Sussex Police; Second Defendant: Southwark Crown Court
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment After Full Hearing
Outcome
Warrant set aside (quashed) for material non-disclosure.
Legal Topics
Search and Seizure Warrants, Judicial Review, Disclosure Obligations, Proceeds of Crime, Confiscation Investigation
Criminal Law Administrative Law Search and Seizure Warrants Judicial Review Disclosure Obligations Proceeds of Crime Confiscation Investigation

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 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Mills

Claimant

Alison Mills

Claimant

Sussex Police

First Defendant

Southwark Crown Court

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment After Full Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the search and seizure warrant was lawfully issued under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002
  2. 2 Whether there was a failure of full and frank disclosure by the police in the application for the warrant
  3. 3 Whether the judge would have refused to issue the warrant had there been proper disclosure

Ratio Decidendi

The warrant was unlawfully issued due to material non-disclosure by the police in their application. The judge might well have refused to issue the warrant had there been full and proper disclosure, particularly given the claimants' history of cooperation. The correct legal test is whether the undisclosed information might reasonably have led the judge to refuse the warrant, not whether the judge would definitely have refused it.

Court Disposition

Warrant set aside (quashed) for material non-disclosure.

Orders

  • The search and seizure warrant issued by Southwark Crown Court on 11 June 2013 is set aside.
  • Further representations to be heard regarding consequential orders and the return or retention of seized materials.