Assets Recovery Agency v Kean [2007] EWHC 112 (Admin) (31 January 2007)

Assets Recovery Agency v Kean [2007] EWHC 112 (Admin) (31 January 2007)

The ARA had a good arguable case that the property was recoverable as proceeds of crime, based on the evidence of cash acquisition, associations with convicted criminals, and the plea of guilty by an associate to laundering Mr Kean's drug money. The procedural defects in disclosure and misrepresentation were not sufficiently serious to warrant discharge of the order, given the public interest and lack of demonstrated prejudice. The proceedings were not an abuse of process as the issues and parties were not identical to prior litigation, and the prior findings did not preclude the ARA's claim. The allegation of fraud in the mortgage application was arguable and should not be precluded at...

Citation
[2007] EWHC 112 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: THE DIRECTOR OF THE ASSETS RECOVERY AGENCY; Defendant: ROBERT ALAN KEAN
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 January 2007
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Property Freezing Order (interlocutory, Civil Recovery) / High Court (administrative Court) Application to Set Aside/vary Interim Order
Outcome
Application to set aside property freezing order refused; property freezing order to continue.
Legal Topics
Property Freezing Orders, Recoverable Property, Abuse of Process, Non Disclosure, Standard of Proof in Civil Recovery, Fraud Allegations, Tracing Proceeds of Crime
Civil Recovery Proceeds of Crime Criminal Law (ancillary Proceedings) Property Freezing Orders Recoverable Property Abuse of Process Non Disclosure Standard of Proof in Civil Recovery +2 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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE DIRECTOR OF THE ASSETS RECOVERY AGENCY

Claimant

ROBERT ALAN KEAN

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Property Freezing Order (interlocutory, Civil Recovery) / High Court (administrative Court) Application to Set Aside/vary Interim Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Assets Recovery Agency has a good arguable case that the property is recoverable property under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002
  2. 2 Whether the property freezing order should be set aside for material non-disclosure or misrepresentation
  3. 3 Whether the proceedings constitute an abuse of process due to prior litigation

Ratio Decidendi

The ARA had a good arguable case that the property was recoverable as proceeds of crime, based on the evidence of cash acquisition, associations with convicted criminals, and the plea of guilty by an associate to laundering Mr Kean's drug money. The procedural defects in disclosure and misrepresentation were not sufficiently serious to warrant discharge of the order, given the public interest and lack of demonstrated prejudice. The proceedings were not an abuse of process as the issues and parties were not identical to prior litigation, and the prior findings did not preclude the ARA's claim. The allegation of fraud in the mortgage application was arguable and should not be precluded at...

Court Disposition

Application to set aside property freezing order refused; property freezing order to continue.

Orders

  • Property freezing order remains in force.
  • Directions to be given for further conduct of the litigation, including consideration of new evidence and fraud allegations.