Criminal Assets Bureau v Saunders & Anor (Unapproved) [2024] IECA 35 (15 February 2024)

The appeal fails because proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 1996 are civil, not criminal; the High Court was entitled to make findings on the balance of probabilities regarding the provenance of the property without affording criminal trial safeguards. No serious risk of injustice was established by delay.

Citation: [2024] IECA 35
Parties: Applicant/respondent: The Criminal Assets Bureau; Respondent/appellant: Stefan Saunders; Respondent/appellant: Tammy Saunders
Jurisdiction: Ireland
Judgment Date: 15 February 2024
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome: appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Proceeds of Crime, Property Freezing Orders, Burden of Proof, Civil Vs Criminal Proceedings, Presumption of Innocence, Delay and Risk of Injustice

Civil Asset Forfeiture Criminal Law Constitutional Law Proceeds of Crime Property Freezing Orders Burden of Proof Civil Vs Criminal Proceedings Presumption of Innocence +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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10

Parties

The Criminal Assets Bureau

Applicant/respondent

Stefan Saunders

Respondent/appellant

Tammy Saunders

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the High Court erred in finding the property was proceeds of crime without criminal trial safeguards
2 Whether delay in bringing the application caused a serious risk of injustice

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

Order under s.3(1) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 1996 prohibiting disposal or dealing with Hazelbury Park property affirmed