Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
National Crime Agency v GKC (No.1) [2026] EWHC 573 (Admin) (13 March 2026)
The High Court refused to discharge an unexplained wealth order and interim freezing order, holding that the NCA had made proper enquiries and could rely on disclosed open-source material.
Mirza v Crown Prosecution Service [2025] EWHC 3349 (Admin) (19 December 2025)
The High Court dismissed Zahid Mirza’s application for a certificate of inadequacy under s.83 Criminal Justice Act 1988, finding no proof of a genuine post-order change in assets.
The Court of Appeal Criminal Division refused leave to appeal against a receivership order enforcing an unpaid confiscation order under POCA.
Director of Public Prosecutions v O'Connor & Ors [2025] EWHC 3000 (KB) (14 November 2025)
The High Court made a civil recovery order over cryptocurrency held in accounts linked to Joseph O'Connor, Keir Holme and Kyle Lomax under POCA.
The High Court made a POCA civil recovery order over cryptocurrency held in accounts linked to Joseph O’Connor, Keir Holme and Kyle Lomax.
HM Revenue and Customs v Xing & Anor [2025] EWHC 2057 (Admin) (01 August 2025)
The High Court granted HMRC a without-notice Property Freezing Order over three properties and a bank account, finding a good arguable case of recoverable property and a real risk of dissipation.
The court granted an unexplained wealth order and interim freezing order over Hope Springs House, finding Ms Schools’ lawful income could not explain the property or renovations.
The High Court refused to discharge or vary a restraint order over Linda McCracken’s property, finding a real risk of dissipation if she sold her share below market value.
McCracken v Crown Prosecution Service [2025] EWHC 604 (Admin) (07 March 2025)
The High Court refused to discharge a restraint order over a home, finding no material non-disclosure and a real risk of dissipation if the share were sold below market value.
The NCA established a good arguable case that the PFO Properties are or include recoverable property obtained through unlawful conduct, specifically money laundering, and there is solid evidence of a real risk of unjustified dissipation. There was no material non-disclosure or unfair presentation by the NCA at the without notice hearing. The PFO should therefore continue.
Source excerpt
Explore more
