Government of Seychelles v Roselie (MC 98/2020) [2020] SCSC 595 (7 September 2020)

Government of Seychelles v Roselie (MC 98/2020) [2020] SCSC 595 (7 September 2020)

The applicant established a prima facie case through belief evidence and documentation anomalies indicating the vehicles were acquired from criminal conduct. The respondent failed to provide a credible or probable explanation for the source of funds or to rebut the applicant's case. The court found reasonable...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] SCSC 595
Parties
Applicant: Government of Seychelles; Respondent: Peter James Roselie
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
7 September 2020
Case Number
MC 98/2020
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application Under POCA (proceeds of Crime (civil Confiscation) Act) / Ruling on Application for Interlocutory Freezing and Receivership Orders
Outcome
Application granted. Interlocutory freezing and receivership orders issued.
Legal Topics
Proceeds of Crime, Money Laundering, Forgery, Uttering False Documents, Conspiracy, Burden of Proof, Unexplained Wealth
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Civil Forfeiture Financial Crime Proceeds of Crime Money Laundering Forgery Uttering False Documents Conspiracy +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Government of Seychelles

Applicant

Peter James Roselie

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application Under POCA (proceeds of Crime (civil Confiscation) Act) / Ruling on Application for Interlocutory Freezing and Receivership Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the specified property (five BMW vehicles) constitutes benefit from criminal conduct under POCA
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has established a prima facie case shifting the burden to the respondent
  3. 3 Whether the respondent has provided a credible explanation for the source of funds for the vehicles

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant established a prima facie case through belief evidence and documentation anomalies indicating the vehicles were acquired from criminal conduct. The respondent failed to provide a credible or probable explanation for the source of funds or to rebut the applicant's case. The court found reasonable grounds to suspect the property is benefit from criminal conduct and granted the interlocutory freezing and receivership orders.

Court Disposition

Application granted. Interlocutory freezing and receivership orders issued.

Orders

  • Respondent or any other person prohibited from disposing or dealing with the specified property (five BMW vehicles) pursuant to section 4 of POCA.
  • Superintendent Hein Prinsloo appointed as Receiver over all of the said property to manage, keep possession or dispose of, or otherwise deal with the property pursuant to section 8 of POCA.