Martin Evans KC successful in Civil Recovery

๐ƒ๐๐ -๐ฏ- ๐’๐ฎ๐ซ๐ข๐ง - [2025] EWHC 10 (KB)

The DPP applied for summary judgment (under CPR 24.2) in a civil recovery claim under Part 5 of PoCA in respect of circa 78 Bitcoin held by S in a wallet associated with an account operated by Coinbase Kenya. Some of the Bitcoin received into the account derived from drug trafficking. Mould J found the DPP had established a credible case that the Bitcoin was โ€˜recoverable propertyโ€™ (under s.240). A recovery order had been made against S in 2015 in respect of three Ferraris, a Rolls-Royce Phantom, the proceeds from the sale of a Bugatti Veyron, real property and cash in bank.

S contended that the account was used for legitimate trading in gold bullion, watches and other luxury items. Applying the principles were summarised in Easyair Ltd (t/a Openair) v Opal Telecom Ltd [2009] EWHC 339 (Ch), Mould J concluded that Sโ€™s caseโ€ lacks any conviction or degree of credibility and raises no genuinely triable issueโ€. As there was no real prospect of defending the claim, he granted summary judgment on the claim and dismissed Sโ€™s strike out application.

The full judgment can be found here.

The DPP was represented by Martin Evans KC of 33 Chancery Lane & Tom Rainsbury of 3 Verulam Buildings.

Chris Chiles