Summary of Judgment - In re Amanda Duffy, Sharon Jordan and Damien McLaughlin - Account Freezing Orders
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Neutral Citation | Summary of Judgment - In re Amanda Duffy, Sharon Jordan and Damien McLaughlin - Account Freezing Orders |
| Court | Court of Judicature (NI) |
| Date | 13 December 2021 |
Judicial Communications Office
1
13 June 2022
COURT DISMISSES APPEAL CHALLENGING ACCOUNT
FREEZING ORDERS
Summary of Judgment
The Court of Appeal today dismissed an appeal challenging the validity of account freezing orders
made in respect of bank accounts held by Amanda Duffy, Sharon Jordan and Damien McLaughlin.
Background
On 6 May 2021, as part of a joint Police Service of Northern Ireland (“PSNI”) and London
Metropolitan Police Service (“LMP”) investigation into the finances of terrorism in Northern Ireland
and in England and Wales, an application was made by LMP to Westminster Magistrates’ Court
(“WMC”) for Account Freezing Orders (“AFOs”). The AFOs were in respect of a number of bank
accounts including accounts in banks and Credit Unions held by Amanda Duffy, Sharon Jordan and
Damien McLaughlin (“the appellants”). AFOs were granted but on 17 May LMP contacted the
court to say that the orders should have been applied for in Northern Ireland and, as a result, the
orders were set aside. On 19 May, the PSNI applied to Belfast Magistrates’ Court (“BMC”) for AFOs
in respect of the applicants’ accounts. These were granted (the AFOs for the bank accounts were for
a period of six months and the AFOs for the Credit Union accounts were for three months).
On 17 September 2021, the PSNI applied for a variation of the AFOs in relation to the Credit Union
accounts to extend them until 19 November 2021, to align with the expiry date of the AFOs in
relation to the bank accounts. In the course of the variation hearing, the applicants challenged the
validity of the AFOs. On 13 September 2021, the applicants lodged an application for leave to apply
for judicial review.
The Statutory Background
The Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 (“the 2001 Act”) provides extensive powers
enabling the authorities to seize assets used by terrorists or for terrorist purposes. This includes
powers to freeze accounts and obtain forfeiture orders in respect of monies held in such accounts.
Paragraph 10 of Schedule 1 to the 2001 Act sets out the process for applying for, making and varying
and setting an AFO. There is also a Code of Practice (“COP”) for Officers Acting under Schedule 1
to the 2001 Act detailing the obligations of all officers involved in making an application for an AFO.
The High Court decision
On 13 December 2021, the trial judge dismissed the application for judicial review of the decision to
vary the AFOs in respect of the Credit Union accounts. Counsel for the applicants submitted that the
applications had not been properly brought as the 2001 Act required “the senior officer” who
authorised the application to consult with HM Treasury (“HMT”). Counsel accepted that HMT
appeared to have been consulted by LMP prior to the applications to WMC but contended that there
had been no consultation by PSNI with HMT in advance of the applications to BMC. The trial judge
accepted that there had not been precise compliance with the requirement of paragraph 10Q(3)(b) of
To continue reading
Request your trial