Rawlinson & Hunter Trustee & Ors, R (on the application of) v Central Criminal Court & Anor

Rawlinson & Hunter Trustee & Ors, R (on the application of) v Central Criminal Court & Anor

The search warrants were quashed because the SFO's presentation to the judge was materially misleading, incomplete, and failed to disclose key facts and context, depriving the judge of the ability to make an informed, balanced, and fair decision. The errors and omissions would have made a real difference to the...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees and others; Defendant: Central Criminal Court; Defendant: Director of the Serious Fraud Office; Interested Party: Vincent Tchenguiz; Claimant: Robert Tchenguiz and R20 Limited; Defendant: Commissioner of the City of London Police
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Search warrants quashed; judicial review allowed; further proceedings on damages and costs transferred to Queen's Bench Division.
Legal Topics
Search Warrants, Disclosure Obligations, Legal Professional Privilege, Arrest and Bail, Misrepresentation, Procedural Fairness
Criminal Law Judicial Review Police Law Search Warrants Disclosure Obligations Legal Professional Privilege Arrest and Bail Misrepresentation +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 6 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees and others

Claimant

Central Criminal Court

Defendant

Director of the Serious Fraud Office

Defendant

Vincent Tchenguiz

Interested Party

Robert Tchenguiz and R20 Limited

Claimant

Commissioner of the City of London Police

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the search warrants issued under s.2(4) of the Criminal Justice Act 1987 were procured by misrepresentation and non-disclosure by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO)
  2. 2 Whether the judge failed to give adequate reasons for granting the warrants
  3. 3 Lawfulness of the arrest and bail of Robert Tchenguiz

Ratio Decidendi

The search warrants were quashed because the SFO's presentation to the judge was materially misleading, incomplete, and failed to disclose key facts and context, depriving the judge of the ability to make an informed, balanced, and fair decision. The errors and omissions would have made a real difference to the judge's decision. The SFO's subsequent retention of documents under a 'here and now' notice was unlawful, as it circumvented the statutory procedure for judicial control. The arrest and bail of Robert Tchenguiz were lawful as the police acted on information provided by the SFO, and the necessity test was met. The SFO's conduct regarding privileged material requires further factual...

Court Disposition

Search warrants quashed; judicial review allowed; further proceedings on damages and costs transferred to Queen's Bench Division.

Orders

  • Declaration that the warrants and searches were unlawful
  • SFO to pay reasonable costs of Rawlinson & Hunter and Vincent Tchenguiz