Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

Syed Ahmed & Anor v Junfang Xu

[2024] EWHC 363 (Admin)
A man was ordered to pay a large sum of money after being convicted of tax fraud. Money from renting out his property, held in his wife's bank account, was seized by the government to help pay off his debt. The wife's attempt to access the money was unsuccessful because the court decided the money was rightfully his. The government's action was considered fair and in accordance with the law.

Key Facts

  • Syed Ahmed and Shakeel Ahmad were convicted of conspiracy to cheat the public revenue and ordered to pay confiscation orders.
  • A restraint order was placed on Syed Ahmed's assets, later including a HSBC account held in his wife Junfang Xu's name.
  • Junfang Xu applied to discharge the restraint order on the HSBC account or allow weekly living expenses.
  • The Crown applied to add the HSBC account to the receivership order.
  • The HSBC account held a balance of approximately £19,196.25, primarily from rental income of Southlands, a property beneficially owned by Syed Ahmed.
  • Southlands' rental income was paid into the HSBC account despite a restraint order on Syed Ahmed's assets.

Legal Principles

Restraint orders can prohibit dealing with realisable property, with provisions for living expenses (section 77, CJA).

Criminal Justice Act 1988 (CJA)

The High Court can appoint a receiver for realisable property to satisfy a confiscation order (section 80, CJA).

Criminal Justice Act 1988 (CJA)

'Realisable property' includes property held by the defendant or received as a tainted gift (section 74, CJA).

Criminal Justice Act 1988 (CJA)

Powers regarding restraint and receivership orders are exercised to satisfy confiscation orders, allowing others to retain their property (section 82, CJA).

Criminal Justice Act 1988 (CJA)

Property need not be directly linked to the crime to be considered realisable.

Manning v Glatt [2002] EWHC 2495 (Admin)

The court can make findings of tainted gifts even if not made in original confiscation proceedings.

Manning v Glatt [2002] EWHC 2495 (Admin)

In applications to discharge or vary restraint orders, the applicant must meet a lower threshold of a good arguable case in relation to the property.

CPS v Compton [2002] EWCA Civ 1720

In applications for living expenses from restrained assets, the applicant must discharge the burden of persuasion regarding the unavailability of other income sources.

SFO v X [2005] EWCA Civ 1564

Outcomes

The Crown's application to add the HSBC account to the receivership order was granted.

The court found the HSBC account balance was likely the defendant's property (or a tainted gift) and its inclusion in the receivership order was consistent with the CJA's statutory steer.

Ms Xu's applications to discharge the restraint order or allow living expenses were dismissed.

The court found the HSBC account balance to be realisable property, and Ms Xu failed to demonstrate a need for weekly living expenses from the account given alternative assets and insufficient financial disclosure.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.