Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 08 JANUARY 2010

Proceeds Of Crime - Judicial Review

Appleby
Appleby
Contributor
Appleby

Appleby

Appleby is a leading offshore law firm. The team of legal specialists advise global public and...

View firm profile
Explore more from Appleby

The vexed question as to the remedies available to a customer when faced by an informal freeze of his assets under the Proceeds of Crime (Jersey) Law 1999 ("the Law"), has again been considered by the Jersey courts and this time for the first occasion by the Court of Appeal (Gichuru v. The States of Jersey Police [2008] JCA 163A).

JerseyWealth Management

The vexed question as to the remedies available to a customer when faced by an informal freeze of his assets under the Proceeds of Crime (Jersey) Law 1999 ("the Law"), has again been considered by the Jersey courts and this time for the first occasion by the Court of Appeal (Gichuru v. The States of Jersey Police [2008] JCA 163A). The problem arises where the police do not give consent to the bank or other financial institution to the release of a customer's funds, due to a suspicion that they may be the proceeds of crime. As a result those funds effectively become subject to an indefinite and informal freeze by virtue of Article 32 of the Law, given that the bank or financial institution is most unlikely to deal with the assets without police consent.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from