header-logo header-logo

Legal profession

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

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
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
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
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
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
back-to-top-scroll