Key Facts
- •The World Uyghur Congress (Appellant) challenged the National Crime Agency's (NCA, Respondent) decision not to investigate alleged offenses under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA) concerning cotton products imported from Xinjiang.
- •The challenge focused on whether the NCA misdirected itself in law by requiring specific identification of criminal property before investigating and believing that an exemption under POCA section 329(2)(c) 'cleanses' criminal property.
- •The High Court judge's decision was appealed to the Court of Appeal.
- •The appeal concerned only the NCA's decision; other defendants were no longer involved.
Legal Principles
Courts are slow to interfere with decisions of independent prosecutors and investigators, except in highly exceptional cases involving misdirection in law.
R (Corner House Research) v Serious Fraud Office [2008] UKHL 60; [2009] 1 AC 756
POCA's definition of 'criminal property' is broad and depends on the alleged offender's state of mind; the same property can be criminal property in one person's hands but not another's.
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, sections 327-329, 340
An investigation under POCA can commence before specific criminal property is identified; the existence of only general, high-level evidence of criminality is not a bar to commencing an investigation.
Court of Appeal's concessions from the NCA
The exemption under POCA section 329(2)(c) for adequate consideration is personal to the individual and does not affect the property's status as criminal property in the hands of someone else.
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, section 329(2)(c)
Section 308 of POCA, not section 329(2)(c), determines when property ceases to be recoverable; good faith, value, and lack of notice are required for the exemption under Section 308.
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, section 308
Outcomes
Appeal allowed; the High Court's decision quashed.
The NCA misdirected itself in law by requiring specific identification of criminal property before commencing an investigation and by misinterpreting the effect of POCA section 329(2)(c).
The case remitted to the NCA for reconsideration of whether to investigate under Part 7 or Part 5 of POCA.
The Court of Appeal found that the NCA's decision was based on errors of law, requiring a fresh consideration of the evidence without these errors.