Financial Intelligence Unit v Mares Corp (SCA 48 of 2011) [2011] SCCA 33 (9 December 2011)

Financial Intelligence Unit v Mares Corp (SCA 48 of 2011) [2011] SCCA 33 (9 December 2011)

The Supreme Court erred by not remitting the matter for trial of the issues where there were contested facts in affidavits; the proper procedure required further pleadings and a full hearing, not summary judgment on affidavit evidence alone.

Citation
[2011] SCCA 33
Parties
Appellant: Financial Intelligence Unit; Respondent: Mares Corp
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
9 December 2011
Case Number
SCA 48 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Supreme Court Ruling on Interlocutory Order Under Proceeds of Crime (civil Confiscation) Act 2008
Outcome
Appeal partly allowed
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Orders, Evidentiary Burden, Civil Confiscation, Money Laundering, Unjust Enrichment
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Criminal Law Anti Money Laundering Interlocutory Orders Evidentiary Burden Civil Confiscation Money Laundering Unjust Enrichment

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Financial Intelligence Unit

Appellant

Mares Corp

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Supreme Court Ruling on Interlocutory Order Under Proceeds of Crime (civil Confiscation) Act 2008

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Supreme Court erred in refusing to grant an interlocutory order under section 4 of the POCCCA
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings should have continued by affidavit or required oral evidence and further pleadings
  3. 3 Whether the evidentiary burden under sections 4 and 9 of the POCCCA was properly applied

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court erred by not remitting the matter for trial of the issues where there were contested facts in affidavits; the proper procedure required further pleadings and a full hearing, not summary judgment on affidavit evidence alone.

Court Disposition

Appeal partly allowed

Orders

  • The ruling of the Chief Justice dated 19 September 2011 is quashed.
  • The matter is remitted to the Supreme Court for exchange of pleadings and trial of the issues.