Call:1967
Qualifications: BA (Cantab)
Practice Teams
Asset Recovery
Civil & Commercial
Criminal
David BarnardPrint CV
Profile
David is one of the founder member of chambers and has served as Head of Chambers since its inception in 1984. Throughout a long and distinguished career he has practiced in criminal and civil litigation and more recently has become most well known for his work in the niche area of asset recovery.
David has been appointed Standing Counsel on the Attorney General's Unified List of Prosecution Advocates since 1992, has been a Recorder of the Civil and Criminal Courts since 1993, was formerly Reader in Criminal and Civil Litigation at The Inns of Court School of Law and is a Bencher of Gray's Inn.
He has very extensive practical expertise in the field of asset recovery having acted for Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office (RCPO) and other government departments in many important serious fraud proceedings as well an ancillary restraint, confiscation and condemnation cases. He is regularly instructed by RCPO to advise on difficult and sensitive cases, especially when issues in relation to the proceeds of crime arise.
David pioneered the implementation of the new civil recovery powers under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA) and acted for the Assets Recovery Agency (now subsumed into the Serious Organised Crime Agency) in two of its key early successes
- Assets Recovery Agency v Charrington [2004] EWHC 1821 (use of summary judgment) and Assets Recovery Agency v Creaven & Ors [2005] EWHC 2726
(Admin) (restriction on use of frozen funds for legal costs). In the latter case utilising the mediation process led to a large financial settlement in favour of the agency.
Reported Cases
Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office v Duffy [2008] EWHC 848 (Admin) - a compensation order made against the defendant, who had been knowingly concerned in fraudulent activity with a view to obtaining payment of a tax credit contrary to the Tax Credits Act 2002 s.35, was quashed and remitted to the magistrates for reconsideration of the appropriate level of compensation to the Revenue.
Assets Recovery Agency v Szepietowski & Ors [2006] EWHC 2406 (Admin)- On a second application for an interim receiving order, the enforcement agency was entitled to use information obtained while executing the first order, which did not have to relate to the same wrongdoing as the second application.
R (on the application of the Assets Recovery Agency) v Creaven & Ors
[2005] EWHC 2726 (Admin): (2006) 1 WLR 622 - The court should not permit a defendant who had available property that was not recoverable property under POCA to use the property that was claimed to be recoverable to meet any of his expenditure pending trial of the claim.
R v K [2005] EWCA 619: (2006) BCC 362 - piercing the corporate veil
Assets Recovery Agency v Charrington & Ors [2005] EWCA Civ 334 - Court of Appeal affirming Summary Judgement procedure and that the argument that proceedings for civil recovery orders should be treated as criminal for Convention purposes was untenable.
R v Ronald & Sylvia Benn [2004] EWCA Crim 2100 - deals with concerns about labaratory testing techniques and possible contamination of evidence. Held that there was no evidence to support these concerns. Further that where a defendant had received advice not to answer questions it was the genuineness of the decision that was relevant, not its quality.
Assets Recovery Agency v Charrington & Ors [2004] EWCA 1821 (Admin) - the use of the summary judgement procedure in confiscation proceedings where the defendant's case was unbelievable.
In Re X [2004] EWHC 861 (Admin) - variation of a restraint order made under the Criminal Justice Act 1988.
R (on the application of Mudie & Mudie) v Dover Magistrates Court [2003] EWCA Civ 237 - condemnation proceedings pursuant to s.139 and Schedule 3 Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 do not amount to criminal proceedings.