Assets Recovery Agency v Customs and Excise & Ors [2005] EWCA Civ 334 (21 January 2005)

Assets Recovery Agency v Customs and Excise & Ors [2005] EWCA Civ 334 (21 January 2005)

The applicant's explanation for the origin of the cash was wholly incredible and unsupported by evidence; summary judgment was properly granted. Civil recovery proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 are not criminal for ECHR purposes, and delay or prior retention of funds by Customs does not bar recovery if the statutory requirements are met.

Citation
[2005] EWCA Civ 334
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Director of the Assets Recovery Agency; First Respondent: Commissioners of Customs and Excise; Second Respondent/appellant: Brian Colin Charrington; Third Respondent: Mario Halley; Fourth Respondent: Curtis Warren
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 January 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal Against Summary Judgment
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Asset Recovery, Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, Civil Vs Criminal Classification, European Convention on Human Rights, Delay in Proceedings
Civil Procedure Proceeds of Crime Human Rights Summary Judgment Asset Recovery Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 Civil Vs Criminal Classification European Convention on Human Rights +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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Director of the Assets Recovery Agency

Claimant/respondent

Commissioners of Customs and Excise

First Respondent

Brian Colin Charrington

Second Respondent/appellant

Mario Halley

Third Respondent

Curtis Warren

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal Against Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether summary judgment was properly granted against the appellant under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings should be classified as criminal for the purposes of Articles 6 and 7 ECHR
  3. 3 Whether delay and retention of funds by Customs precluded recovery

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's explanation for the origin of the cash was wholly incredible and unsupported by evidence; summary judgment was properly granted. Civil recovery proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 are not criminal for ECHR purposes, and delay or prior retention of funds by Customs does not bar recovery if the statutory requirements are met.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed with costs