英语论文网

S 333A – the offence of “tipping off”
A person commits an offence if he discloses the fact that a disclosure has been made (either by him or by another person) to a constable, a Customs and Excise officer, a nominated officer (like a MLRO) or to a staff member at Serious and Organised Crime Agency
AND that disclosure might prejudice (harm) any follow up investigation
AND the information留学生论文代写网 on which the disclosure is based has come to the person in the course of a business within the regulated sector
ALSO an offence of “tipping off” if a person discloses that an investigation into allegations that a money laundering offence has been committed or is being carried out AND the disclosure is likely to harm the investigation
Defences to the offence of tipping off – i.e. when can bank staff disclose that a report has been made or that an investigation is likely?
Sections 333B-D permit certain intra-group disclosures, disclosures to legal advisers, disclosures within the business or within the group or disclosures to a person’s “supervisory authority” within the Money Laundering Regulations 2007 (see lectures 5-6)
Some case law examples of problems caused by “tipping off” offence
A good example of the kind of dilemma that banks can find themselves in when they are worried about “tipping off” their customers and therefore committing an offence under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 is provided by the earlier case of
Bank of Scotland v A Ltd & Others ( Court of appeal – on Blackboard)
Prior to POCA 2002 – under previous law  Section 93A of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 contained one of the basic offences of money laundering as defined in UK law. It criminalized conduct which  assisted another to retain the benefits of criminal conduct and exempts the reporting to the police of suspicions or belief of such conduct from any restrictions on disclosure of information otherwise imposed by law.
It also imposed a criminal offence on conduct which can amount to the effective “tipping off” of any person of the fact that such disclosure has been made or any other information or matter, which could prejudice an actual or potential police investigation of money-laundering activity
A company referred to throughout the case as A Ltd opened sterling and US dollar accounts with the bank in 1999. As substantial sums began to be transferred to these accounts the bank became suspicious and began to worry about its exposure to legal risk under the civil law of constructive trusteeship in respect of the monies held in these accounts.
The bank suspected that the monies could represent the proceeds of fraud and communicated its suspicions to the police. The bank became aware that serious criminal investigations were ongoing into the activities of an individual referred to as “T” who appeared closely associated with A Ltd.

...it  was  worried that this meant it should not pay out any money of A Ltd’s accounts due to the possibility of the monies  in that account being the subject of a constructive trust. BUT  the bank was warned by the police that if it did NOT pay out on the accounts, and A Ltd brought an action against it, it would not be able to defend such an action as the police warned  the bank that disclosure of what it had told them would expose it to criminal liability for tipping-off…
In what it saw as “no win” situation the bank sought directions as to how to procee本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。