KB-2024-001295 - [2025] EWHC 3000 (KB)
Fecha: 14-Nov-2025
Events between the CMC and 9 June 2025
Events between the CMC and 9 June 2025
After the CMC, the hearing of the claim was listed for 9 June 2025.
There were difficulties in serving D1 with the documents other than the claim form, as I explain further at [69]-[75] below.
D2 and D3 agreed to accept service of further documents by email. Accordingly, they were served with the bundle for the 9 June 2025 hearing (“the disposal hearing bundle”) on 24 March 2025 and the supplementary bundle for the same hearing on 28 May 2025. They were also sent Mr Pons’ skeleton argument by email.
D1 did not engage with the proceedings in any way until a few hours before the hearing on 9 June 2025, when an email was received by the court apparently from his mother. In it, Mrs O’Connor said that she was contacting the court with D1’s “full authority and consent”. The email made various points about service of the documents, expressed concern about the position of the victims in the US and referred to the legal advice D1 had been given. Most pertinently, Mrs O’Connor said in the email that D1 had “no objection to the assets which are the subject of the proceedings being seized”. She did not ask to attend the hearing or that the hearing be adjourned. However, she was offered the opportunity to attend the hearing and arrangements were quickly put in place for her to join remotely. I am grateful to the court staff for making those arrangements.
- Heading
- Introduction
- The evidence
- The factual background in overview
- (ii): D2 and D3
- More detail on the source of the funds in the accounts
- The legal framework
- The procedural history prior to the 9 June 2025 hearing
- The Case Management Conference (“CMC”) on 18 March 2025
- Events between the CMC and 9 June 2025
- The 9 June 2025 hearing
- Proceeding in the absence of D2 and D3
- Service of the hearing papers on D1
- Events after the 9 June 2025 hearing
- The 11 November 2025 hearing
- Analysis and decision
- (ii): The location of the Property
- (iii): “Recoverable property”
- (a): The nature of the Property itself
- (b): The way the Property is held
- (c): Additional efforts undertaken to conceal the origin of the Property and its connection to the D1
- (d): The US offences
- (f): The lack of any evidence in response to the Claimant’s case
- Conclusions