We are pleased to announce our new website is available.
This will give us the ability to produce news regularly, together with constantly changing and updated content.
Please check back regularly for news, and information that you may find of use.
© Bankside Law, 2012
Barrister Jonathan Goldring instructed by Bankside Law appeared on behalf of a Ghanian national who was stopped by the UK Border Agency (UKBA) carrying £60,000 in cash. The application made under the civil forfeiture rules meant the UKBA had to show unlawful conduct as defined in Section 241 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.
The UKBA argued they were not (and had never been previously) required in law to point to any particular type or category of criminal activity and that inferences could be drawn from the surrounding circumstances. Jonathan successfully argued that there had to be some evidence of a type of criminal conduct albeit of a generalised nature. Relying on a number of authorities including R v Walker 2010, R v Gale 2009, R v Szepietowski 2007, Jonathan was able to persuade the court that the UKBA had failed to show any unlawful conduct and the forfeiture application was refused with costs awarded.
© Bankside Law, 2010
The current financial crisis has seen the rise of allegations of mortgage fraud across the spectrum. Bankside Law recently successfully defended a chartered accountant accused of conspiracy to defraud by being involved in a dishonest agreement to perpetrate a mortgage fraud on a number of banks and building societies. The prosecution's case was that our client had falsely and dishonestly certified incomes from mortgagors so they could obtain mortgages. Our client was represented by Osondu Anodu who instructed specialist fraud advocates Avtar Bhatoa as lead counsel with Jonathan Goldring as junior counsel. Having considered our client's instructions and the evidence in the case, expert forensic accountant, Sam Narula, of Samuels was instructed.
With assistance from our legal team Sam was able to produce a report which seriously challenged the basis of the case against our client. The prosecution instructed their own expert who was unable to rebut the findings of Mr Narula and consequently they offered no evidence.
Osondu said at the conclusion of the case that, "This case highlighted the true essence of case preparation and the need to exploit all avenues including the scrutiny of all the prosecution evidence in cases". Mr Bhatoa, said, "This case is an instance of an early termination of a prosecution by pro-active defending where the instruction of a good forensic accountant expert led to the prosecution realising that their case was untenable and therefore caused them to offer no evidence. The defendant was formally found not guilty and able to carry on in his profession."
Bankside Law represents Metropolitan Police Authority in Ali Dizaei Disciplinary Proceedings
Bankside Law (John Williams) received instructions from the Metropolitan Police Authority to act as the independent solicitor in the disciplinary proceedings brought against former Metropolitan Police Commander Ali Dizaei.
The case was dealt with by way of a fast track special procedure and was heard before a Police Disciplinary Tribunal on 26th March 2010 when an application to adjourn was refused. The Tribunal found that his behaviour fell below the appropriate standard by virtue of the convictions and recommended dismissal. On the 31st March 2010 the Metropolitan Police Authority considered the recommendation from the Tribunal and dismissed Mr Dizaei.
Counsel instructed was Paul Ozin of 23 Essex Street. For further information and comment see the Telegraph article here.
© Bankside Law, 2010