header-logo header-logo

10 January 2025 / Ashley Fairbrother , Joe Nahal-Macdonald , Sarah Wood
Issue: 8099 / Categories: Features , Criminal , Crypto , Fraud , Technology
printer mail-detail

Burn-and-remint: a new tool in cryptoasset recovery?

202615
Could a bold interpretation of the new powers contained in Part 5 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 provide a silver bullet for law enforcement? Ashley Fairbrother, Joe Nahal-Macdonald & Sarah Wood set out the case
  • This article considers the new powers contained within Pt 5 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, and whether UK law enforcement should harness the cryptocurrency Tether’s ‘burn-and-remint’ mechanism to help victims to recover stolen assets.
  • The authors consider that the criteria to be satisfied in order for these new powers to be used are met, and moreover that there is likely to be a willingness by both law enforcement and the courts to adopt a purposive interpretation to these powers.

With effect from 26 April 2024, the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 introduced new powers into Pt 5 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA 2002) providing for the seizure, detention, freezing and forfeiture of cryptoassets and related items. These

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll