Wills & Trusts Law Reports | July/August 2016 #161The claim arose from a purported sale of a property to the claimant by a fraudster who purported to be, but was not in fact, the registered owner of the property. By the time the fraud was discovered the whole of the purchase price had been paid by the claimant to the second defendant (the claimant’s conveyancer), by the second defendant to the first defendant (the fraudster’s solicitor) and by the first defendant to an account in Dubai upon the fraudster’s instructions.
The fraudster’s instructions to the first defendant were that the property had been given to him by his father,...
Simrun Garcha discusses the implications of Credit Agricole Corporation and Investment Bank v Papadimitriou [2015] ‘The court accepted the argument that “the arrangement could not have any commercial purpose other than money laundering” and the complex structure involved would have caused a reasonable bank to become suspicious of improper motive.’ The Privy Council’s recent decision …
Continue reading "Money Laundering: Vigilance at all times"
This post is only available to members.
Hannah Herbert provides an update on AML4 ‘The degree to which the 4th Anti Money Laundering Directive acts as a burden on trustees will depend upon how the requirement that the information provided to the central register is accurate and current is transposed into domestic law.’On 16 December 2014 the Presidency of the Council of …
Continue reading "Money Laundering: Balancing privacy and risk"
This post is only available to members.
