Financial Intelligence Unit v Sullivan (CS 101 of 2011)  SCSC 63 (31 August 2011);
THE REPUBLIC OF SEYCHELLES
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SEYCHELLES HOLDEN AT VICTORIA
Civil Side No. 101 of 2011
The Financial Intelligence Unit===============================Applicant
Sulieman Neal Sullivan S A================================Respondent
Barry Galvin, State Counsel, for the Applicant
The applicant is seeking an interlocutory order pursuant to section 4 of the Proceeds of Crime (Civil Confiscation) Act, hereinafter referred to as POCA, prohibiting the respondent or any person who has notice of the order from disposing of or dealing with or diminishing in value the sums of money, hereinafter referred to as specified property, held in the respondent's account with Barclays Bank (Seychelles) Ltd. The application is brought by way of notice of motion and supported by an affidavit sworn by Mr Hogan, Deputy Director, of the applicant. The applicant is a statutory body. The respondent is a company incorporated as international company in the Republic of Seychelles. While opening its account with Barclays Bank (Seychelles) Ltd the respondent indicated that its business was business advisory and wealth management company services.
The applicant seeks a further order appointing Mr Liam Hogan as a Receiver of the specified property to hold the same until further orders of this court. Much as the respondent was served with a copy of this application it did not turn up for the hearing of the same. The hearing proceeded in its absence.
The grounds of this application are that the respondent is in possession or control of specified property that constitutes directly or indirectly, benefit from criminal conduct, or was acquired in whole or in part with or in connection with property that is directly or indirectly, benefit from criminal conduct. This property is in excess of R50,000.00.
Barclays Bank (Seychelles) Ltd, has received, according to the documents annexed to Mr Hogan's affidavit at least three requests from three different banks that had remitted money to the respondent's account, call back requests on the ground that their customers have complained that they were victims of a share sale scam. Mr Hogan believes that the transfer of such funds to Seychelles amounts to committing the crime of money laundering in Seychelles.
I have examined the documentary evidence annexed to Mr Hogan's affidavit. I am satisfied that this information, of course, together with the unchallenged affidavit of Mr Hogan that there are reasonable grounds at this stage to suspect that the specified property constitutes directly or indirectly, benefit from criminal conduct, or was acquired in whole or in part with or in connection with property that is directly or indirectly, benefit from criminal conduct.
I therefore allow this application and issue an interlocutory order prohibiting the disposal of, dealing with or diminishing in value of the specified property. I further appoint Mr Liam Hogan to be the Receiver of the said specified property and to hold the same in an interest bearing account in Barclays Bank (Seychelles) Ltd until further orders of this court. Costs of these proceedings will abide the final outcome of the proceedings in relation to the specified property in this matter.
Signed, dated and delivered at Victoria this day of September 2011