(1) There continues to be an officer known as the Official Petitioner for the purpose of discharging, in relation to cases in which a criminal bankruptcy order is made, the functions assigned to him by or under this Act; and the Director of Public Prosecutions continues, by virtue of his office, to be the Official Petitioner.
(2) The functions of the Official Petitioner include the following—
(a) to consider whether, in a case in which a criminal bankruptcy order is made, it is in the public interest that he should himself present a petition under section 264(1)(d) of this
**Trials are provided to all LexisPSL and LexisLibrary content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial.
Existing user? Sign-in
Take a free trial
You may apply simplified customer due diligence (SDD) measures in relation to particular business relationships or transactions which you determine present a low risk of money laundering or terrorist financing, having taken into account:•your organisation-wide risk assessment—see Practice Note:
Having established that a duty of care exists (see Practice Note: Negligence—when does a duty of care arise?), it is then necessary to consider whether or not there has been a breach of that duty. This will depend on a number of factors outlined below and considered against the general background of
Issue estoppel is a sub-species of the res judicata doctrine (see Practice Note: The doctrine of res judicata). In addition to the general key requirements for establishing a res judicata (see Practice Note: Key requirements to establish a res judicata), this Practice Note considers the specific
Tipping off and prejudicing an investigationIt would undermine the benefit to the authorities if, a suspicious activity report (SAR) having been made, the alleged offender were to be made aware of the interest in their activities so that they could take steps to cover up their misdeeds or disappear.
0330 161 1234
To view the latest version of this document and millions of others like it, sign-in to LexisLibrary or register for a free trial.