The Court of Appeal has dismissed Graham Whelan’s appeal against an order freezing just over €75,000 in an AIB account in his name, finding the money had been received in connection with a scheme to launder proceeds from his drugs trade.
The appeal concerned only that bank balance. The High Court had also made an order under section 3 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 1996 covering cash, a watch and money in a stockbroker’s account. Whelan did not appeal the findings relating to those other assets.
The €75,000 was transferred to Whelan by John Wilson on 18 January 2019. It came from a larger compensation payment Wilson had received for a workplace injury. A written loan agreement was signed the day after gardaí searched a hotel room where Whelan and another man were present. The search yielded other evidence linked to organised criminal activity and the drugs trade.
The High Court found that Whelan received the money to use in money laundering and intended to repay Wilson with proceeds of crime. The Court of Appeal said a legitimate loan could serve as the vehicle for laundering other money: the €75,000 itself did not have to be the proceeds being laundered. Its receipt could be caught by section 3 because it was acquired in connection with property derived from criminal conduct. The judges said previous financial dealings between the two men supported the finding of an ongoing scheme.
The court stressed that the High Court had made no finding against Wilson, who was not a party to the case. It also noted that he could apply under section 3(3) to have the order discharged or varied, but had not done so.
Whelan also argued that the order left him owing Wilson under the loan while preventing him from using the money to repay it. The Court of Appeal said there was no evidence of his ability or inability to repay, and that he had not raised the alleged serious risk of injustice in the High Court. It rejected this ground as well as the challenge to the proceeds-of-crime finding.
The court dismissed the appeal. It did not make a final disposal order; the section 3 order remained in place. The parties may file written submissions on costs within 28 days of the judgment.