Criminal Assets Bureau -v- Murphy Junior & Anor [2016] IECA 40 (18 February 2016)

Criminal Assets Bureau -v- Murphy Junior & Anor [2016] IECA 40 (18 February 2016)

The exclusionary rule does not apply to in rem proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 1996; the property is the object of the proceedings, not evidence against a person; the provenance of the property is the issue, and the manner of its seizure is not relevant to the application of the exclusionary rule. Hearsay and belief evidence are admissible under s.8 of the Act if the court is satisfied as to reasonable grounds. The High Court was correct to admit the evidence and make the interlocutory order.

Citation
[2016] IECA 40
Parties
Applicant/respondent: Criminal Assets Bureau; Respondent/appellant: Michael Murphy Junior; Respondent/appellant: Michael Murphy Senior; Notice Party: Amy Forrest
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
18 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (in Rem Asset Forfeiture) / Appeal From High Court Interlocutory Order Under S.3 Proceeds of Crime Act 1996
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Proceeds of Crime, Exclusionary Rule, Admissibility of Evidence, In Rem Proceedings, Hearsay Evidence, Constitutional Rights
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Proceeds of Crime Exclusionary Rule Admissibility of Evidence In Rem Proceedings Hearsay Evidence +1 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 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Criminal Assets Bureau

Applicant/respondent

Michael Murphy Junior

Respondent/appellant

Michael Murphy Senior

Respondent/appellant

Amy Forrest

Notice Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (in Rem Asset Forfeiture) / Appeal From High Court Interlocutory Order Under S.3 Proceeds of Crime Act 1996

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the exclusionary rule apply to evidence obtained in breach of constitutional rights in civil in rem proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 1996?
  2. 2 Is hearsay evidence admissible to ground belief evidence under s.8 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 1996?
  3. 3 Was the High Court correct to admit evidence obtained from a search later found unconstitutional under Damache v. DPP?

Ratio Decidendi

The exclusionary rule does not apply to in rem proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 1996; the property is the object of the proceedings, not evidence against a person; the provenance of the property is the issue, and the manner of its seizure is not relevant to the application of the exclusionary rule. Hearsay and belief evidence are admissible under s.8 of the Act if the court is satisfied as to reasonable grounds. The High Court was correct to admit the evidence and make the interlocutory order.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Interlocutory order under s.3 Proceeds of Crime Act 1996 affirmed; property remains frozen subject to the exclusions specified by the High Court.