R v Tichipiwa Chigunwe

An appellate court may approve a consent order resolving an appeal against an enforcement receivership order. Where the agreed terms alter the declared beneficial interests in identified assets, the appeal is allowed only to that limited extent and the original order is amended accordingly. No contested issue of statutory construction or principle is determined by such a disposal.

The appellant challenged an Enforcement Receivership Order made by HHJ Rowland in the Crown Court on 7 July 2022 under section 65 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

The parties proposed that the appeal be resolved by consent. The agreed order changed the declarations concerning the defendant’s beneficial interests in the net proceeds of sale of two properties. The Court of Appeal was asked to approve those terms and determine the appeal accordingly.

The appeal was allowed by consent, but only to the agreed extent.

1. The court carefully considered the proposed consent order and approved it.
2. The Enforcement Receivership Order was amended so that the defendant was declared to hold 55 per cent of the beneficial interest in the net proceeds of sale of 2 Burnaby Close, rather than the entire beneficial interest.
3. The corresponding declaration concerning 15 Cottage Close was amended in the same way, to 55 per cent of the net proceeds of sale.
4. There was no order as to costs. The court determined no contested question of law or statutory interpretation.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): In [2023] EWCA Crim 1040, the court approved the parties’ consent order and allowed the appeal to the limited extent of amending the beneficial-interest declarations.
• Crown Court: HHJ Rowland made the Enforcement Receivership Order on 7 July 2022.