Ani v Barclays Private Bank Ltd. [2004] JLR 165 (22 April 2004)

Ani v Barclays Private Bank Ltd. [2004] JLR 165 (22 April 2004)

A bank's refusal to release funds after a suspicious transaction report and absence of police consent is justified under the Proceeds of Crime (Jersey) Law 1999, art. 32(1), and may be challenged by public law action against the police or private law action against the bank.

Citation
[2004] JLR 165
Parties
Applicant: Ani; Respondent: Barclays Private Bank Ltd.
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
22 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory
Outcome
interlocutory guidance
Legal Topics
Proceeds of Crime, Freezing of Assets, Suspicious Transaction Report, Police Consent, Bank Liability
Criminal Procedure Banking Law Public Law Proceeds of Crime Freezing of Assets Suspicious Transaction Report Police Consent Bank Liability

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ani

Applicant

Barclays Private Bank Ltd.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a bank may refuse to release funds after a suspicious transaction report and absence of police consent under the Proceeds of Crime (Jersey) Law 1999, art. 32(1)
  2. 2 Whether the refusal can be challenged by public law action against the police or private law action against the bank

Ratio Decidendi

A bank's refusal to release funds after a suspicious transaction report and absence of police consent is justified under the Proceeds of Crime (Jersey) Law 1999, art. 32(1), and may be challenged by public law action against the police or private law action against the bank.

Court Disposition

interlocutory guidance