(1)Conduct occurring in any part of the United Kingdom is unlawful conduct if it is unlawful under the criminal law of that part.
Definitions used in section 241 2
- part
“part”, in relation to property, includes a portion,
Defined in s.316(1) · see it in the full Act- unlawful conduct
“unlawful conduct” has the meaning given by section 241,
Defined in s.316(1) · see it in the full Act
Cases considering section 241 64
Gale and another v Serious Organised Crime Agency
Section 241 defines unlawful conduct by reference to the criminal law applicable where the conduct occurred and prescribes the civil standard for deciding whether it occurred (see paras [4]-[5]; [54]-[57]). Conduct within the United Kingdom is unlawful conduct if it is unlawful under the criminal law of the relevant part of the United Kingdom (see para [118]). The direction to decide alleged unlawful conduct on the balance of probabilities was compatible with article 6. The subsection was applied according to its clear natural meaning (see paras [5]-[8]; [54]-[57]). The provision expressly requires the court to determine on the balance of probabilities whether matters alleged to constitute unlawful conduct occurred (see paras [118]-[124]).
World Uyghur Congress, R (on the application of) v National Crime Agency
Section 241 defines unlawful conduct for the Part 5 civil-recovery scheme. The court explained its domestic, foreign and gross-human-rights-abuse categories (see paras [41]-[42]). Section 241(1) identifies conduct occurring in the United Kingdom as unlawful conduct where it is unlawful under the criminal law of that part of the United Kingdom (see para [41]). Section 241(2) generally requires foreign conduct to be unlawful both in the foreign jurisdiction and under the criminal law of the United Kingdom. The court identified this as the general dual-criminality rule (see paras [41]-[42]). Section 241(2A) was identified as an exception to the general dual-criminality rule for gross human-rights abuse or violation which would amount to a sufficiently serious United Kingdom offence (see paras [41]-[42]). Section 241(3) requires the court to decide on the balance of probabilities whether alleged unlawful conduct occurred or whether property was intended for unlawful conduct (see para [41]).
Jones v Birmingham City Council
The court used the definition of unlawful conduct as conduct unlawful under the criminal law to demonstrate that civil proceedings may require proof of criminal conduct without determining a criminal charge. (see para [53]) The court used the civil standard prescribed for the recovery scheme as a direct analogy against the contention that proof of criminal conduct necessarily required proof beyond reasonable doubt. (see paras [53]-[54])
- The National Crime Agency v Namli & Anor
- Serious Organised Crime Agency v Perry & Ors
- Gale & Ors v Serious Organised Crime Agency
- Olupitan & Anor v Assets Recovery Agency (includes Addendum)
- Director of Public Prosecutions v Joseph James O’Connor & Ors
- John Hamilton & Anor v Abigail Marshall Katung & Ors
- The Director of Public Prosecutions v Debora Krasniqi & Anor
- Director of Public Prosecutions v Glenford Robert Adams & Anor
- Director of Public Prosecutions v Alexander Surin
- World Uyghur Congress, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Ors
- The Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police, R (on the application of) v Manchester Crown Court
- National Crime Agency & Anor v Odewale & Anor
- Sandhu v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police
- National Crime Agency v Khan & Ors
- The Serious Fraud Office v Saleh
- National Crime Agency v Azam & Ors
- Nuro v The Home Office
44 more judgments, and what each says about section 241, are in the case-law panel in the full Act.
291.Subsection (1) defines conduct occurring in the UK as unlawful if it is unlawful under the criminal law of the part of the UK in which it occurred.
292.Subsection (2) extends the definition of ‘unlawful conduct’ to include conduct which occurs outside the United Kingdom and is unlawful under the criminal law of that country, and would be unlawful if it occurred in any part of the United Kingdom. The effect of this provision is to enable property which has been obtained through conduct abroad to be recovered, or cash which has been so obtained to be forfeited, if the conduct was unlawful where it took place and would be unlawful in at least one part of the United Kingdom; and to enable cash which is intended for use abroad to be forfeited if the conduct for which it is intended would be unlawful both in at least one part of the United Kingdom and in the country where it was intended to occur.
293.Subsection (3) makes clear that the test the court or sheriff must use in determining whether matters alleged to constitute unlawful conduct have occurred or whether any person intended to use cash for unlawful conduct is the balance of probabilities. That is the normal standard of proof applicable in civil proceedings. The criminal standard of proof, under which matters must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, does not therefore apply in civil recovery or cash forfeiture proceedings.