header-logo header-logo

Whose cash is it anyway?

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

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

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll