header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Cracking down on crypto

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
11 October 2024 / Andrew Bird KC
Issue: 8089 / Categories: Features , Criminal , Crypto , Cybercrime , Regulatory
printer mail-detail
192561
The state now recognises that cryptoassets are being used to trade & hold the proceeds of crime. Andrew Bird KC examines the new regulatory powers
  • Examines the new powers added to the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 for the search, seizure, freezing, forfeiture and destruction of cryptoassets, in force since 26 April 2024. What is set out below applies only to England and Wales. Similar provisions for Scotland are not yet in force.

On 26 April 2024, the amendments to the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA 2002) enacted in Sch 8 and 9 to the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 (ECCTA 2023) were brought into force. These provide express powers of search, seizure, freezing, forfeiture, realisation and/or destruction of cryptoassets and cryptoasset-related items (CRIs). Definitions are provided, and non-fungible tokens, as well as cryptocurrency, are included.

In fact, the more adventurous law enforcement agencies had been using existing legislation without challenge for some years, as the definitions of ‘property’ in s 84 of POCA 2002

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Partner appointed as head of residential conveyancing for England

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

Specialist firm enhances corporate healthcare practice with partner appointment

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Gold on Awaab’s Law & digital divorce
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
NLJ this week: AI in the dock—courts need literacy, not fear
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Landlords lose their upward climb
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
NLJ this week: Privy Council undresses the ‘shareholder rule’
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
NLJ this week: Regan’s case of the year
Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School and the Frenkel Topping Group—AKA The insider—crowns Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP as his case of 2025 in his latest column for NLJ. The High Court’s decision—that non-authorised employees cannot conduct litigation, even under supervision—has sent shockwaves through the profession. Regan calls it the year’s defining moment for civil practitioners and reproduces a ‘cut-out-and-keep’ summary of key rulings from Mr Justice Sheldon
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll