M. (F) (Plaintiff) v M. (B)

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Finnegan P.
• Judgment Date: 03 November 2006
• Neutral Citation: [2006] IEHC 396
• Docket Number: No. 4783P/1997
• Court: High Court
• Date: 03 November 2006

M (M F) v M (B) & M (K)

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION PURSUANT

TO THE

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT, 1996

BETWEEN

M F M

PLAINTIFF

AND

B M AND K M

DEFENDANTS

[2006] IEHC 396

No. 4783P/1997

THE HIGH COURT

Abstract:

Proceeds of crime - Freezing order - Interlocutory order freezing assets - Application for discharge of freezing order - Complaint in relation to circumstances in which freezing order obtained - Whether freezing order should be discharged - Proceeds of Crime Act 1996 (No. 30), section 3

pursuant to application to it by the plaintiff, the court made an interlocutory order pursuant to section 3(1) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 1996 freezing certain property alleged to constitute the proceeds of crime. The first defendant was not in attendance on the date the section 3 order was made. The defendants sought an order pursuant to section 3(3) of the Act of 1996 and/or the inherent jurisdiction of the court discharging or varying the section 3(1) order on the basis that the manner in which the order was obtained constituted an injustice.

Held in refusing the application that as the first defendant had proffered no explanation for his absence on the date the section 3(1) order was made, the court had no power to make an order pursuant to section 3(3) of the Act of 1996 or pursuant to its inherent jurisdiction varying the order. Section 3(3) of the Act of 1996 was not directed to the circumstances in which an order pursuant to section 3(1) was made but to the circumstances which applied at the time of the application and in which circumstances the order was operating.

Reporter: P.C.

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S2

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S3

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S3(3)

MAHER v DIXON 1995 1 ILRM 218

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S4

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S3(1)

Finnegan P.

1 As will be clear from the Record Number these proceedings commenced in 1997. The reliefs sought in the proceedings were Orders pursuant to section 2 and 3 of the Proceeds of Crime Act1996. An Order pursuant to section 2 was made on the 25th April 1997: that Order also provides as follows —

"And it is further ordered pursuant to Order 10 Rule 2 of the Rules of the Superior Courts that the Plenary Summons issued herein and all subsequent pleadings be served on the first named Defendant by serving true copies thereof on the second named Defendant."

2 The Plaintiff's motion for an Order pursuant to section 3 of the Act came before the Court on the 12th May 1997 and on that day the Court made an Order pursuant to section 3 but limited as to time until after the 9th June 1997. By that Order the Court also deemed service of the Notice of Motion seeking relief pursuant to section 3 on the Defendants good and sufficient. On the 9th June 1997 the section 3 Order was continued without limitation as to its duration.

3 The Defendants bring this Notice of Motion seeking the following reliefs —

4 1. An Order pursuant to section 3(3) of The Proceeds of Crime Act1996discharging and/or varying the section 3 Order made herein.

5 2. Further or alternatively an Order pursuant to the inherent jurisdiction of the Court discharging or varying the section 3 Order made herein.

6 The Motion is grounded on the Affidavit of the Defendants” solicitor. In that Affidavit he deposes that there was no appearance...