The Supreme Court is hearing a challenge by a Clare man, who is facing trial in Britain regarding an alleged £100 million (€150 million) VAT carousel fraud, to the validity of search warrants issued to the Criminal Assets Bureau which authorised searches of his home, company premises and the office of an accountant.
During the searches, large quantities of documents were seized and sent to Britain. The authorities there had intended to use them in the prosecution of Mr Dylan Creaven and other persons but, following a High Court decision last February that some warrants were not issued validly because the British authorities had not adhered to the relevant UK law, the documents seized have been returned, by order of the court, to the CAB.
Both Mr Creaven and the CAB have appealed aspects of that High Court decision to the Supreme Court. Should the CAB's appeal succeed, it is likely to forward the documents again to the British authorities.
Mr Creaven, arrested in London on November 19th, 2002, is on bail awaiting trial on charges connected with the alleged fraud. No trial date has been set.
It is claimed the extent of the alleged fraud exceeded £100 million and involved high-value computer components and the alleged movements of these goods in a circle between various firms to generate VAT payments that had not been declared. Mr Creaven and his companies have denied the claims.
In High Court proceedings last year, Mr Creaven and two of his companies, Silicon Technologies (Europe) and Bradenville Holdings, challenged two sets of search warrants issued the day before his arrest in London.
The challenge related to five search warrants issued by District Judge David Anderson on November 18th, 2002, under Section 55 of the Criminal Justice Act, 1994. He also challenged seven search warrants relating to Mr Creaven's home, the Silicon premises and premises of another company, homes of company employees and the offices of an accountant and solicitor.
In a reserved judgment last February, the President of the High Court, Mr Justice Finnegan, struck down the five Section 55 warrants but upheld the validity of the seven Section 14 warrants issued to the CAB.
In the Supreme Court yesterday, Mr Michael Collins SC, with Mr Paul Gardiner SC, for Mr Creaven, appealed against the decision on the Section 14 warrants. Mr Collins argued that the High Court was wrong in finding Judge Anderson had the jurisdiction required to issue the warrants.
Counsel also argued that, having quashed the Section 55 warrants, the High Court was wrong in ordering that the items seized on foot of the Section 55 searches be returned to the CAB and not Mr Creaven.
In their cross-appeal, the CAB and the State are disputing the High Court decision on the Section 55 warrants.
The hearing continues today before the five judge court.
