header-logo header-logo

14 August 2008
Issue: 7334 / Categories: Case law , Tax , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Legal profession

Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office v Allad [2008] EWCA Crim 1741, [2008] All ER (D) 407 (Jul)

The solicitors’ client was suspected of VAT evasion. The Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office (RCPO) obtained a restraint order (under s 41 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002) restraining him from disposing of his assets.

He had paid £5,000 to the solicitors on account of their fees. The solicitors, who had done work worth in excess of the £5,000, wanted to transfer the money out of the client account.

HELD The purpose of a criminal restraint order, as with a civil freezing order, is not to prevent third parties from enforcing civil rights against a defendant if those rights would be unaffected by any order which may be made against the defendant at the end of the proceedings.

The solicitors were entitled to take the course proposed without committing any contempt of court. They should notify RCPO in advance, in case there was any challenge to the size or propriety of their bill, but no variation to the restraint order was required in order to enable them to utilise the money in payment of their fees.

Issue: 7334 / Categories: Case law , Tax , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll