Crown Prosecution Service v Richards & Anor

Crown Prosecution Service v Richards & Anor

Where all matrimonial assets (save for a minor exception) are the proceeds of drug trafficking and the spouse seeking ancillary relief had knowledge of their criminal origin, public policy requires that such assets be subjected to confiscation and not distributed in ancillary relief proceedings. The judge erred in awarding a lump sum to the wife; the tainted nature of the assets and her knowledge were dispositive.

Parties
Appellant: Crown Prosecution Service; 1st Respondent: Lindsay Jane Richards; 2nd Respondent: Anthony Stephen Richards
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 June 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Ancillary Relief, Confiscation of Proceeds of Crime, Public Policy, Matrimonial Property, Drug Trafficking
Family Law Criminal Law Ancillary Relief Confiscation of Proceeds of Crime Public Policy Matrimonial Property Drug Trafficking

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Crown Prosecution Service

Appellant

Lindsay Jane Richards

1st Respondent

Anthony Stephen Richards

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether assets derived from drug trafficking can be distributed in ancillary relief proceedings where the spouse seeking relief had knowledge of their criminal origin
  2. 2 How to balance public policy against deprivation of proceeds of crime with the welfare of dependants under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973

Ratio Decidendi

Where all matrimonial assets (save for a minor exception) are the proceeds of drug trafficking and the spouse seeking ancillary relief had knowledge of their criminal origin, public policy requires that such assets be subjected to confiscation and not distributed in ancillary relief proceedings. The judge erred in awarding a lump sum to the wife; the tainted nature of the assets and her knowledge were dispositive.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • The order for a lump sum of £39,250 in the ancillary relief proceedings is set aside.
  • The restraint order is varied by substituting £35,750 for £75,000 in paragraph 4(c).