header-logo header-logo

Crime fighters put cryptoassets in their sights

24 May 2024 / Nick Barnard
Issue: 8072 / Categories: Features , Profession , Crypto , Cyber , Cybercrime , Technology
printer mail-detail
174011
Criminals love them, but now enforcement agencies have the statutory tools to fight back, writes Nick Barnard
  • On 26 April 2024, amendments to the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 came into force, giving law enforcement new tools to freeze, seize or even destroy cryptoassets.
  • Explains crypto-wallet freezing orders and crypto-wallet forfeiture orders.
  • The new orders are based on the Account Freezing Order regime.

Since their ascent to mainstream attention over the past decade, cryptoassets have proved a vexed challenge for law enforcement agencies (LEAs), particularly those charged with disrupting money-laundering and recovering the proceeds of crime.

Unlike cash (which exists only in physical form) or funds in bank accounts (which are controlled by a regulated third party with established law as to ownership and location), cryptoassets represent a new form of liquid digital value, which can be held and transferred in entirely new ways.

As a starting point, the infrastructure of cryptoassets generally makes no provision for recording or enforcing the ‘owner’ of

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

National Pro Bono Centre—Esther McConnell & Sarah Oliver Scemla

National Pro Bono Centre—Esther McConnell & Sarah Oliver Scemla

Charity strengthens leadership as national Pro Bono Week takes place

Michelman Robinson—Akshay Sewlikar

Michelman Robinson—Akshay Sewlikar

Dual-qualified partner joins London disputes practice

McDermott Will & Schulte—Karen Butler

McDermott Will & Schulte—Karen Butler

Transactions practice welcomes partner in London office

NEWS
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold dives into the quirks of civil practice, from the Court of Appeal’s fierce defence of form N510 to fresh reminders about compliance and interest claims, in this week's Civil Way
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) has restated a fundamental truth, writes John Gould, chair of Russell-Cooke, in this week's NLJ: only authorised persons can conduct litigation. The decision sparked alarm, but Gould stresses it merely confirms the Legal Services Act 2007
The government’s decision to make the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) the Single Professional Services Supervisor marks a watershed in the UK’s fight against money laundering, says Rebecca Hughes of Corker Binning in this week's NLJ. The FCA will now oversee 60,000 firms across legal and accountancy sectors—a massive expansion of remit that raises questions over resources and readiness 
The High Court's decision in Parfitt v Jones [2025] EWHC 1552 (Ch) provided a striking reminder of the need to instruct the right expert in retrospective capacity assessments, says Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell in NLJ this week
Paige Coulter of Quinn Emanuel reports on the UK’s first statutory definition of SLAPPs under the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll