The respondent, Mr Luckhurst, faces criminal proceedings in the Crown Court. The indictment alleges fraud and theft arising out of Mr Luckhurst’s conduct practising as an independent financial advisory in a company called BBT Partnership Limited. The CPS’ case is that Mr Luckhurst ran a fraudulent Ponzi scheme and stole money from clients. In 2016, a number of BBT’s investors brought civil proceedings in the High Court against Mr Luckhurst and others. Those civil proceedings are ongoing. In December 2017, on the application of the CPS, the Crown Court made a restraint order against Mr Luckhurst under the POCA. This was to preserve Mr Luckhurst’s assets to meet any confiscation order which may be made by the Crown Court under the POCA in the event of Mr Luckhurst’s conviction. Mr Luckhurst instructed solicitors to defend the civil claim agaisnt him and sought a variation to the restraint order to pay those solicitors £3,000 for advice on a settlement. Mr Luckhurst’s variation application was refused by the judge at first instance but allowed on appeal. The CPS now appeals to the Supreme Court.

AA was a 32-year-old citizen of Nigeria with no right to remain in the United Kingdom. In 2013 he was convicted of conspiracy to supply class A drugs and sentenced to 4½ years’ imprisonment. Following his release the Secretary of State made a deportation order on the ground that he was a foreign criminal. AA sought to challenge that order by relying on his right to private life under article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and on the rights to family life of his partner and children. The First-tier Tribunal allowed his appeal on the grounds that his deportation would disproportionately interfere with the rights of his partner and two children under article 8. The Upper Tribunal set aside the First-tier Tribunal’s decision and directed that the appeal be re-heard. Following the re-hearing the Upper Tribunal dismissed AA’s appeal against the deportation order. On AA’s further appeal the Court of Appeal reinstated the First-tier Tribunal’s decision. The Secretary of State now appeals to the Supreme Court.