Serious Organised Crime Agency v Amir Azam and Others Saunders Law Ltd (Interested Party)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr Justice Globe |
| Judgment Date | 03 June 2013 |
| Neutral Citation | [2013] EWHC 1480 (QB) |
| Docket Number | Case No: 474/2011 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
| Date | 03 June 2013 |
[2013] EWHC 1480 (QB)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
Mr Justice Globe
Case No: 474/2011
and
Mr A Sutcliffe QC and Mr J Hall (instructed by SOCA Legal Department) for the Claimant
Mr M Harries (instructed by Rahman Ravelli Solicitors) for the First Respondent
Ms L Bates (instructed by Saunders Law Ltd) for the Interested Party
Hearing date: 21 May 2013
Approved Judgment
I direct that pursuant to CPR PD 39A para 6.1 no official shorthand note shall be taken of this Judgment and that copies of this version as handed down may be treated as authentic.
SUMMARY
Between 28 April 2010 and 3 May 2013, the first respondent (Azam) was represented by the interested party (Saunders) in proceedings for a civil recovery order (CRO) brought by the claimant (SOCA) pursuant to S.243(1) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 ( POCA). Since 3 May 2013, he has been and continues to be represented by Rahman Ravelli Solicitors. SOCA's re-amended CRO claim is listed for trial on 15 July 2013. The total sum claimed is in the region of £3.5 million.
There are two applications before the court for the variation of a property freezing order (PFO), made by Silber J on 22 February 2010 and subsequently varied and extended, in connection with the CRO.
By an application dated 13 May 2013, Saunders apply to vary the PFO to exclude £223,796.53 plus VAT from the PFO to meet Azam's past legal expenses.
By an application dated 16 May 2013, Azam applies to vary the PFO to exclude from the PFO present and future legal expenses of Rahman Ravelli associated with defending the CRO claim.
BACKGROUND FACTS
Azam resided in the United Kingdom until about July 2002.
SOCA's claim is that, since at least 1996, Azam has been engaged in criminal conduct, principally drug trafficking and money laundering, thereby acquiring real property and cash in bank accounts which amount to recoverable property under POCA. Reliance is placed on a lack of sufficient legitimate income to justify his assets. Reliance is also placed on surveillance, carried out by the National Crime Squad over a lengthy period prior to Azam leaving the country in 2002, which establishes his participation in activity consistent with drug trafficking and his close association with many people who have been convicted of such offences. In granting the PFO, Silber J accepted that SOCA had a good arguable case against the respondents.
Azam's dealings with two Luxembourg bank accounts are of particular relevance to the present applications. In September 1999, he opened a bank account in Luxembourg at the Banque De Luxembourg (BDL). In the period up to April 2000, it received five cash deposits totalling US$500,000. In April 2000, he opened a second bank account in Luxembourg at the Kredietbank (KBL) using a pseudonym and into which he deposited €255,645. It is SOCA's case that, during the same period of September 1999 to April 2000, Azam was subject to police surveillance in the United Kingdom and was seen associating with numerous individuals who were involved in and later convicted of a conspiracy to supply controlled drugs.
In July 2002, Azam went to live in Dubai.
In February 2006, Azam was arrested in Dubai and held in custody on drug trafficking and money laundering offences allegedly committed in Dubai. The allegation of drug trafficking related to 2,500 kilograms of cannabis. The allegation of money laundering included allegations in relation to Dubai bank accounts held by Azam in respect of which there remain credit balances totalling about £425,000.
In March 2007, Azam was convicted and sentenced to 25 years imprisonment for drug trafficking and 5 years imprisonment concurrent for money laundering. He appealed.
Pending the appeal, on 22 February 2010, the assets of the respondents were frozen by the PFO made by Silber J pursuant to S.245A of POCA. Specified assets included various properties and bank accounts including Azam's account at KBL European Private Bank, Luxembourg (KBL). At the time of the application for the PFO, SOCA was unaware of the existence of the BDL account.
Paragraph 4 of the PFO is in the following terms:
"4. Under Section 245C of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 and the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Legal Expenses in Civil Recovery Proceedings) Regulations 2005, this Order shall be subject to an initial exclusion for the release of restrained funds to pay for legal representation in connection with this Order, in that you shall be entitled to a sum not exceeding £3,000 to meet your reasonable legal costs so that you may:
a. take advice and comply with this Order;
b. prepare a statement of assets in order to obtain the release of further property to pay further legal expenses in accordance with paragraph 7A.3 of the Civil Recovery Proceedings Practice Direction as amended on 1 January 2006; and
c. if so advised, apply for the Order to be varied or set aside;
But any sums released for this purpose may only be released in accordance with the provisions of Part 3 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Legal Expenses in Civil Recovery Proceedings) Regulations 2005."
Paragraph 5 of the PFO is in the following terms:
"5. You may be entitled to the release of restrained funds to pay for legal representation in connection with this Order in excess of the initial exclusion as detailed in paragraph 4 above. A request for the release of a sum in respect of reasonable legal expenses (such sum being additional to the £3,000 as provided by way of initial exclusion to this Order at paragraph 4 above) must be made in writing to SOCA and before any release can be made certain conditions must be fulfilled. You and your legal adviser are referred to the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Legal Expenses in Civil Recovery Proceedings) Regulations 2005 (SI 3382 of 2005) and the Civil Recovery Proceedings Practice Direction."
Paragraph 10 of the PFO required the respondents within 21 days of service of the order to serve statements certified by a statement of truth informing SOCA of all of their assets whether in or outside England and Wales.
Paragraph 12 of the PFO required Azam to repatriate the funds in the KBL account. The account was also frozen by the authorities in Luxembourg and it took time for the funds to be repatriated.
Shortly after the PFO was made Azam's appeal succeeded. The convictions were quashed by the Abu Dhabi Federal Supreme Court. The case was remitted back to the Abu Dhabi Federal Court of Appeal for retrial. There were numerous adjournments in relation to that process. The ultimate decision was that there is to be no retrial of the drug trafficking allegation but there is to be a retrial of the money laundering offence. Pursuant to that decision, Azam was eventually released from custody on 16 March 2013 and he returned to this country on 19 March 2013.
In the intervening period, on 28 April 2010, Saunders commenced acting for Azam. In correspondence, Saunders confirmed that they were not representing Azam in the criminal proceedings in UAE but were otherwise "acting for him generally in relation to all proceedings".
According to a confirmation received from the UAE Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the PFO documents were served on Azam on 18 August 2010. He had 21 days to file a statement of assets. No statement was filed.
In October 2010, Saunders applied to set aside the PFO. It was opposed by SOCA. It was listed for hearing in January 2011. The application was withdrawn prior to the hearing. The obligation on Azam to file a statement of assets continued. Saunders contended that it was not possible to file a statement because of a lack of access to Azam who remained imprisoned in Dubai and it was very difficult to take instructions.
Azam's statement in support of his application includes a description of the conditions under which he says he was being held in prison. He states that he had to share an overcrowded single room with many other prisoners with food and water being scarce. He was in a constant state of malnutrition and dehydration. There was no fixed exercise regime. He was under constant threat of being tortured or being thrown into solitary confinement. His contact with the outside world was limited to one ten minute social visit each week, an occasional twenty minute private visit and a fifteen minute monthly allowance to make telephone calls. He states that his wife, who had returned to England, made him aware of the CRO and PFO proceedings in a telephone call. He makes no reference to being served with the proceedings. To the contrary, he states that efforts made to provide him with the paperwork in relation to the proceedings failed because the prison refused to allow him to receive any paperwork that was not in Arabic. He claims that he did not see any paperwork until he saw his solicitor in prison in April 2012. He says that the situation improved slightly in 2011 when phones were fitted in the prison and he had greater access to his lawyers particularly later on in 2012 when SOCA agreed to an exclusion of £750 to be allowed as credit to his telephone account. Notwithstanding all of this, he says that in total he has spent only 25 hours with his lawyers dealing with these proceedings.
Since the hearing, Mr Rahman of Rahman Ravelli (but not Saunders) has produced to me a witness statement dated 23 May 2013 by Mr Brian Rose-Smith, a senior solicitor employed by Saunders. The witness statement exhibits a "full-view billing guide" of the work done on behalf of Azam by Saunders. Within it there is a record of a telephone attendance between Mr James...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The Serious Organised Crime Agency (Claimant Respondent) v Amir Azam (Defendant Appellant)
...IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION THE HON MR JUSTICE GLOBE [2013] EWHC 1480 (QB) Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL (Transcript of the Handed Down Judgment of WordWave International Limited A Merrill Communi......