Can a creditor recover money owed by a person (natural or corporate) who is subject to a restraint order under Part two of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002? The issue has recently been considered by the Court of Appeal in SFO v Lexi Holdings & M. The outcome has worrying implications for creditors.A restraint order (RO) under Part two of the Act is an interim order made in the Crown Court 'prohibiting any specified person from dealing with any realisable property held by him'. Dealing includes paying creditors. It does not confer any rights in relation to that property. It is essentially a means to an end; the end being the satisfaction of a confiscation order.
October 08, 2008 at 09:03 PM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Legalweek
Those wishing to vary restraint orders in order to recover debt face challenges
Can a creditor recover money owed by a person (natural or corporate) who is subject to a restraint order under Part two of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002? The issue has recently been considered by the Court of Appeal in SFO v Lexi Holdings & M. The outcome has worrying implications for creditors.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Celebrate outstanding achievement in law firms, chambers, in-house legal departments and alternative business structures.
The African Legal Awards recognise exceptional achievement within Africa s legal community during a period of rapid change.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Shipman is seeking an associate to join our Labor & Employment practice in our Hartford, New Haven, or Stamford office. Candidates shou...
Evergreen Trading is a media investment firm headquartered in NYC. We help brands achieve their goals by leveraging their unwanted assets to...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
