Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 s.360 – Statements

(1)A statement made by a person in response to a requirement imposed on him under a disclosure order may not be used in evidence against him in criminal proceedings.

(2)But subsection (1) does not apply—

(a)in the case of proceedings under Part 2 or 4,

(b)on a prosecution for an offence under section 359(1) or (3),

(c)on a prosecution for an offence under section 5 of the Perjury Act 1911 (c. 6) or Article 10 of the Perjury (Northern Ireland) Order 1979 (S.I. 1979/1714 (N.I. 19)) (false statements), or

(d)on a prosecution for some other offence where, in giving evidence, the person makes a statement inconsistent with the statement mentioned in subsection (1).

(3)A statement may not be used by virtue of subsection (2)(d) against a person unless—

(a)evidence relating to it is adduced, or

(b)a question relating to it is asked,

by him or on his behalf in the proceedings arising out of the prosecution.

Cases considering section 360 3

Serious Organised Crime Agency v Perry & Ors

[2010] EWCA Civ 907 · 29 July 2010Limits

Section 360(1) prevents a statement made in response to a disclosure-order requirement from being used against the maker in criminal proceedings. Its domestic focus was relied on by the dissent as a pointer against extra-territorial scope. (see paras [19]; [60])

National Crime Agency (NCA) v Simkus & Ors

[2016] EWHC 255 (Admin) · 12 February 2016

Confirms: answers obtained under a disclosure order are excluded from most criminal proceedings, whereas documents produced under a notice are not excluded by statute. (see para [16])

Serious Organised Crime Agency v Azam & Ors

[2013] EWHC 627 (QB) · 21 March 2013Limits

Section 360 is noted as restricting the use of statements made in response to a disclosure order in criminal proceedings, with a different position for confiscation proceedings. The judgment does not decide any issue concerning the operation of that protection (see para [29]).

What each judgment says about section 360 is in the case-law panel in the full Act.

Explanatory note

520.As part of the Government’s response to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Saunders v UK, Schedule 3 to the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 amended a number of compulsory disclosure powers in order to prevent a statement obtained under compulsion from a person from being used to incriminate him (subject to exceptions). Similar provision is made in this section.

All the explanatory notes for the Act

Amendments and notes

4 notes from legislation.gov.uk

Modifications

C155S. 360 applied (1.4.2003) by The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Investigations in different parts of the United Kingdom) Order 2003 (S.I. 2003/425), arts. 1, 7(3), 17(3)
C156S. 360 applied (with modifications) (1.4.2003) by The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Investigations in different parts of the United Kingdom) Order 2003 (S.I. 2003/425), arts. 1, 27(3)(4), 28(3)(4) (as amended (1.4.2008) by S.I. 2008/298, arts. 1(1), 2(9)(10))
C157S. 360 restricted (1.4.2003) by The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Investigations in different parts of the United Kingdom) Order 2003 (S.I. 2003/425), arts. 1, 27(6)(8), 28(8) (as amended (1.4.2008) by S.I. 2008/298, arts. 1(1), 2(9)(10))

Commencement

I315S. 360 in force at 24.2.2003 by S.I. 2003/120, art. 2, Sch. (with arts. 3, 4) (as amended (20.2.2003) by S.I. 2003/333, art. 14)