Assets Recovery Agency v Customs and Excise & Ors

Assets Recovery Agency v Customs and Excise & Ors

The applicant's explanation for the cash was wholly incredible and unsupported by evidence. The proceedings are civil, not criminal, and the Director is not disabled from recovery by the delay or retention of cash by Customs. Summary judgment was properly granted.

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; Decision on Summary Judgment
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Asset Recovery, Money Laundering, Civil Vs Criminal Classification, Delay in Proceedings, European Convention on Human Rights
Proceeds of Crime Civil Procedure Human Rights Summary Judgment Asset Recovery Money Laundering Civil Vs Criminal Classification Delay in Proceedings +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 7 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; Decision on Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the cash seized was the proceeds of crime and subject to recovery 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 of the European Convention on Human Rights
  3. 3 Whether delay and retention of cash by Customs without court order disables the Director from recovery

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's explanation for the cash was wholly incredible and unsupported by evidence. The proceedings are civil, not criminal, and the Director is not disabled from recovery by the delay or retention of cash by Customs. Summary judgment was properly granted.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed with costs