header-logo header-logo

06 June 2019 / Simon Davenport KC , Helen Pugh
Issue: 7843 / Categories: Features , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Whose cash is it anyway?

After a fêted introduction, UWOs have had a stop-start beginning. But are things about to change, ask Simon Davenport QC & Helen Pugh 

  • There are various grounds of challenge to UWOs including disputing the ownership, value, income and PEP requirements and disputing non-compliance.
  • A trap for the unsuspecting lies in the wide use to which UWO information and documents can be put.

In the last couple of weeks unexplained wealth orders (UWOs) have once again been making a splash in the news. The few details released by the National Crime Agency (NCA) about the latest UWOs are sufficiently headline grabbing: ‘a politically exposed person believed to be involved in serious crime’; ‘three residential properties in prime locations’; and ‘bought for more than £80m and held by offshore properties’. The current anonymity of the subject of the UWOs—and their nationality—merely adds to the interest.

Russia and CIS states, and their citizens resident in London, have been a particular target of recent political and media attention on corruption (and other matters).

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll