Customs & Excise v D'Souza & Ors [2001] EWCA Civ 901 (7 June 2001)

Customs & Excise v D'Souza & Ors [2001] EWCA Civ 901 (7 June 2001)

The judge was entitled to scrutinize the late evidence and conclude that only a small portion of the funds had an arguable legitimate provenance; no important point of principle or practice arose, and there was no compelling reason to grant permission for a second appeal.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 901
Parties
Claimant: Commissioners of Customs & Excise; Defendant: Norman Edward D'Souza; Defendant: Richard D'Souza; Defendant: Martina D'Souza; Defendant: Hyacinth D'Souza
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 June 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal (second Appeal)
Outcome
application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Burden of Proof, Appeals, Constructive Trust, Proceeds of Crime
Civil Procedure Fraud Trusts Summary Judgment Burden of Proof Appeals Constructive Trust Proceeds of Crime

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Commissioners of Customs & Excise

Claimant

Norman Edward D'Souza

Defendant

Richard D'Souza

Defendant

Martina D'Souza

Defendant

Hyacinth D'Souza

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal (second Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in granting summary judgment under Part 24 without a full trial.
  2. 2 Whether the judge improperly assessed credibility of affidavit evidence without oral examination.
  3. 3 Whether the existence of some legitimate trading activity undermined the inference that all funds were proceeds of fraud.

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to scrutinize the late evidence and conclude that only a small portion of the funds had an arguable legitimate provenance; no important point of principle or practice arose, and there was no compelling reason to grant permission for a second appeal.

Court Disposition

application for permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Application refused.