17 Circular Road
Douglas
Isle of Man
IM1 1AF
British Isles

Tel.:
+44 1624 670003



contiadvocates
@yahoo.com



Petition of FP Frederiksen & ors

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

CP 1996/90

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE ISLE OF MAN CHANCERY DIVISION
-------------------------

IN THE MATTER of certain Notices issued pursuant to Section 24 of the Criminal Justice Act 1990 and IN THE MATTER of the Decision of the Attorney General made on or about the 14th June 1996 and IN THE MATTER of the Petition dated the 26th day of July 1996 of FRANK PROVSTGAARD FREDERIKSEN, HENRIK ANDERS VINTEN, JENS LASSEN, K-WEST HOLDINGS LIMITED, K-WEST HOLDINGS TRUST, MEC INTERNATIONAL INC, KSK INTERNATIONAL INC and HAMWELL LIMITED.

-------------

Reasons for Judgment
delivered by His Honour THE DEEMSTER CORRIN at Douglas the 20th day of December 1996.

On 26th July 1996 the Petitioners filed their Petition of Doleance against decisions of Her Majesty's Attorney General for the Isle of Man which were made pursuant to section 24 of the Criminal Justice Act 1990. The decisions of the Attorney General followed a request for assistance from S. Nolfi Andersen of the Criminal Police in Slagelse, Denmark. On 19th July 1994 an authorisation pursuant to section 24 (10) of the Act in respect of the Petitioners (except J.E. Lassen) was issued by the Attorney General to Detective Constable Roger Thomson and duly executed on 16th August 1994 at 19 Peel Road, Douglas when certain files held there were seized. On 17th August 1994 a further Notice pursuant to section 24 (10) of the Act in respect of the Petitioner J.E. Lassen was issued by the Attorney General to Detective Constable Guy Leslie Pickard and this second Notice was also duly executed at 19 Peel Road when additional files were removed.

Complaint is now made by the Petitioners in the Petition of Doleance for the reasons therein stated that the Attorney General wrongfully exercised his discretion under section 24 of the Act and the Petitioners request this Court to review the Attorney's decision and to revoke the Notices as well as calling upon him to use his best endeavours to recover the documentation confiscated as a result of the execution of the notices. In addition the Petitioners claim damages.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

© 1999-2011 Conti. All rights reserved