Government of Seychelles v Marie (MC 76/2020) [2020] SCSC 606 (17 September 2020)

Government of Seychelles v Marie (MC 76/2020) [2020] SCSC 606 (17 September 2020)

The court was satisfied on affidavit evidence that there were reasonable grounds to believe the property was the benefit of criminal conduct and its value exceeded the statutory threshold, justifying the interim order and appointment of a receiver.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] SCSC 606
Parties
Applicant: The Government of Seychelles; Respondent: Liza Michelle Marie
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Case Number
MC 76/2020
Procedural Posture
Ex Parte Application for Interim Order (civil Confiscation) / Interim Order Granted at First Instance
Outcome
Application allowed; interim order granted; receiver appointed; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Proceeds of Crime, Civil Confiscation, Interim Orders, Receivership
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Proceeds of Crime Civil Confiscation Interim Orders Receivership

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Government of Seychelles

Applicant

Liza Michelle Marie

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Ex Parte Application for Interim Order (civil Confiscation) / Interim Order Granted at First Instance

  1. 1 Whether there are reasonable grounds to believe the specified property is the benefit of criminal conduct
  2. 2 Whether an interim order prohibiting disposal or dealing with the property should be granted
  3. 3 Whether a receiver should be appointed for the specified property

Ratio Decidendi

The court was satisfied on affidavit evidence that there were reasonable grounds to believe the property was the benefit of criminal conduct and its value exceeded the statutory threshold, justifying the interim order and appointment of a receiver.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; interim order granted; receiver appointed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • Interim order prohibiting disposal, dealing with, or diminishing the value of the specified property (Euro 9390/SCR 197,190)
  • Appointment of Superintendent Hein Prinsloo as receiver of the specified property