Windsor & Ors v Crown Prosecution Service

Windsor & Ors v Crown Prosecution Service

The judge was wrong to find reasonable cause to believe the alleged offenders benefited from criminal conduct based on the material before him; the assets of the Eastenders group were not realisable property held by the alleged offenders, and the orders appointing a receiver in relation to those assets must be quashed.

Parties
Defendant: Alexander Windsor; Defendant: Kulwant Singh Hare; Defendant: Avtar Singh Hare; Interested Party: Pelvinder Kaur Hare; Interested Party: Eastenders Cash & Carry PLC and other interested parties; Respondent: The Crown Prosecution Service
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Restraint and Receivership Orders
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; restraint and receivership orders quashed as to Eastenders group; effect of order suspended pending fresh application in Crown Court.
Legal Topics
Restraint Orders, Receivership Orders, Proceeds of Crime, Corporate Veil, Appeals Procedure
Criminal Law Corporate Law Asset Forfeiture Restraint Orders Receivership Orders Proceeds of Crime Corporate Veil Appeals Procedure

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alexander Windsor

Defendant

Kulwant Singh Hare

Defendant

Avtar Singh Hare

Defendant

Pelvinder Kaur Hare

Interested Party

Eastenders Cash & Carry PLC and other interested parties

Interested Party

The Crown Prosecution Service

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Restraint and Receivership Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was reasonable cause to believe alleged offenders benefited from criminal conduct
  2. 2 Whether restraint and receivership orders were properly made
  3. 3 Whether assets of Eastenders group were realisable property held by alleged offenders

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was wrong to find reasonable cause to believe the alleged offenders benefited from criminal conduct based on the material before him; the assets of the Eastenders group were not realisable property held by the alleged offenders, and the orders appointing a receiver in relation to those assets must be quashed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; restraint and receivership orders quashed as to Eastenders group; effect of order suspended pending fresh application in Crown Court.

Orders

  • Assets of Eastenders group excluded from restraint and receivership orders; receiver appointment quashed.
  • Suspension of effect of final order relating to first ground to permit respondent to make fresh application.