header-logo header-logo

Prove it!

Must the police identify criminal activity in summary cash forfeiture proceedings? Francesca Whitelaw and Elliot Gold report

Civil recovery of the proceeds of crime is now a common feature of the criminal courts. But not necessarily criminal law. Procedures for the recovery of such proceeds may take the form of civil proceedings even though such applications are heard in the criminal courts. For some, this has led to confusion. Practitioners have disagreed over both the burdens and the standards of proof that relate to different parts of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA 2002).

It is now accepted that the authority pursuing the application must demonstrate that the proceeds of crime are as such on the balance of probabilities. In other words, the test is “more likely than not”. However, this has led to another question which has been more difficult to answer. That is, must the prosecuting authorities identify the type of unlawful activity from which the proceeds are derived? Some authorities have said that the applicant/authority

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

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

Forum of Insurance Lawyers elects president for 2026

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Partner joinslabour and employment practice in London

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

NEWS
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
back-to-top-scroll