National Crime Agency v GKC (No 1)

On an application to discharge unexplained wealth and interim freezing orders made without notice, the High Court must reconsider the statutory conditions afresh on the evidence, but it is not conducting a review of the original judge’s evaluative decision.

The duty to make proper enquiries concerns enquiries reasonably required before the application. The investigating authority has latitude in choosing between informal and formal investigative powers. The statutory scheme does not require it first to obtain information from solicitors or foreign enforcement authorities.

Open-source reporting may provide a sufficient evidential basis for reasonable suspicion where its sources and limitations are disclosed and the material is sufficiently specific. For money laundering, the predicate offence must satisfy dual criminality, but the serious-crime requirement may still be met where the evidence includes other predicate offences satisfying that test.

The National Crime Agency obtained, without notice, an unexplained wealth order under section 362A of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 and an interim freezing order under section 362J. The orders concerned two English apartments and six bank accounts held in the Respondent’s name.

The Respondent applied to discharge them, alleging material non-disclosure, inadequate prior enquiries, failure to obtain corroboration from conveyancing solicitors and Singaporean enforcement authorities, and an error concerning dual criminality. The application also raised the continuing effect of the orders after the original hearing before Bourne J in [2025] EWHC 1908 (Admin).

The central questions were whether the statutory conditions remained satisfied, whether the NCA’s enquiries and disclosure were adequate, and whether the alleged money-laundering conduct met the dual-criminality requirement.

1. Application dismissed. The statutory conditions for the unexplained wealth order and interim freezing order were satisfied both when the orders were made and at the hearing. The orders were maintained, subject to the operative response periods, and costs were awarded to the NCA.
2. On a discharge application, the High Court considers the statutory conditions afresh and may receive fresh and updating evidence. It is not exercising a review jurisdiction over the original judge’s evaluative judgment. The dynamic nature of the jurisdiction does not create a fiction that the NCA is making a wholly new application in present circumstances.
3. The requirement for proper enquiries under R (Virdee) v NCA concerns enquiries before making the application. The NCA has latitude in selecting appropriate investigative routes. Nothing in the statutory scheme required prior enquiries of the conveyancing solicitors, agents or Singaporean enforcement authorities, or prior use of production-order powers.
4. The NCA had a solid evidential picture from Land Registry material, statutory requests to sellers, letting-agent information, and Home Office and HMRC evidence. The red-flag transfer for no value justified proceeding with urgency. Disclosure of the open-source reporting, including its possible unreliability and reporting limitations, was sufficient. There was no material non-disclosure or material failure of enquiry.
5. The court proceeded on the basis that both a derivative money-laundering offence and its predicate offence must satisfy dual criminality, following the approach accepted in Wieromiejczyk v DPP. The challenge nevertheless failed because the evidence extended beyond online gambling to online scam frauds, which were predicate offences satisfying dual criminality. No material error of law was established.
6. The anonymity order remained in force pending a further notified hearing. The court reserved its final decision on continuation or discharge of anonymity.

First-instance decision. The unexplained wealth order and interim freezing order had previously been made without notice by Bourne J on 18 July 2025. The Respondent’s application to discharge them was dismissed by Fordham J.