Stacks Image 4904
Stacks Image 4
We are a member of Winteam500 Law Group with over 100 branches worldwide in China, Russia, South Korea, Malaysia, Thailand, USA, Canada, Germany. Our UK branches are located as follows:

Latitude Office:
Unit 1 Latitude
155 Bromsgrove Street
Birmingham B5 6AB
Tel: 0121 6921898
Fax: 0121 6223828

Willenhall Office:
Quickjay Buildings
Bilston Street
West Midlands
WV13 2AW
Tel: 01902 366 615
Fax: 01902 366 614

Please book an appointment through
07802 881 523 or 01902 366 615

If you need emergency advice at a Police Station,
call 07779 253 682.
Head Office/Registered Address:

Ian Henery Solicitors Limited
Quickjay Buildings
Bilston Street
West Midlands
WV13 2AW
Tel: 01902 366 615
Fax: 01902 366 614

SRA ID: 519162
Company Registration No: 6998324
VAT Reg. No. 754 467 406
ICO Reg. No. Z2003051

Licensed by the Solicitors Regulation Authority as an Alternative Business Structure
Ian D. Henery
Irene Yoong-Henery
Bernard K.Y. Yoong
Su Peng Lee
Stacks Image 18
Stacks Image 20
Stacks Image 22
Privacy Policy: We would like to reassure the public that any information provided to us regarding your identity, location or your case will not be shared with any 3rd parties for marketing. We never sell your data. Your information may need to be shared with credit reference agencies, other solicitors and other authorities and companies for use in fraud prevention, anti-money laundering checks, dealing with your case or to pursue debtors etc.
Fee-earners in this area of expertise
Stacks Image 600


Stacks Image 258395


Criminal Law

Free Legal Advice: If you are arrested, call us. You are always eligible for FREE legal representation at a Police Station if you have been arrested or if you are being interviewed under caution.

NEVER go into an interview with the Police without a Solicitor. Always wait for a Solicitor to represent you DESPITE what the Police may say to you. We are contracted to be there within 45 minutes any time of the day or night 24/7.

365 days a year. Yes, we even work on Christmas Day!

Our Emergency Mobile is 07779 253 682 for all those hours outside of Office Hours, if you have been arrested. Call 01902 366 615 during Office Hours.

The Snow Ball Case

Some years ago, we represented a child who was over 10 years of age and therefore liable to be prosecuted. He had taken part in a snow ball fight with his friends. Unfortunately, one of the boys had a bruise on his face and told his mother, who reacted by making a complaint to the police that her son was assaulted even though the boy had willingly taken part in the snow ball fight. Our client was arrested but before our police station representative could get to see him, he admitted to the police with his parents present, that he had hit the other child in the face with a snow ball. Despite robust representations, the police gave our client, though a child, a criminal record.
If you do not want this to happen, please wait for your solicitor.

Criminal Law - Extradition on Intellectual Property case

One of the most notorious cases of Counterfeiting of Goods we have done relates to the 2007 case of ABRO Industries, U.S.A., alleging that our client (we shall call him Mr. Chan to protect his identity) had stolen their corporate identity and counterfeited industrial adhesives (or glue to the rest of us). ABRO managed to lay a trap for our client, enticing him to come to the UK for a business meeting and then having him arrested and imprisoned to await extradition to the U.S.A.

We managed to get our client bail (meaning we went to Court and convinced the Judge to release him from jail) against all the odds, greatly impressing the Chinese Embassy whose official commented that we really do pull out all the stops for our clients. Our client, despite being an influential and powerful businessman in China, was abandoned by his staff in the UK and we had to liase directly with his family to look after him and to protect his interests. He was extremely grateful as he had not ever been in jail before and he had not ever imagined that he would be a guest of Her Majesty's Prison Service! We advised that he was not likely to get a fair trial in the U.S.A. as the press in the U.S.A. was going into overdrive over the arrest and he had effectively been tried and found guilty by the American media even before he had set foot in the country.

Our client managed to flee the U.K. (we must emphasise that we had nothing to do with arranging this) and return to China where apparently (according to TIME magazine) he was welcomed back as a folk hero that had escaped the clutches of a bullying U.S.A.

Our Views of the Case

In our opinion, the U.S. authorities had misused Extradition Laws that were made for extraditing terrorists to protect an Indiana manufacturing company's Intellectual Property rights. "Using a sledge hammer to crack a nut" comes to mind. We cannot fathom why British authorities would entertain such an absurd request to extradite a business man on a case involving super-glue. But all future would-be-counterfeiters of US branded goods - please take note.
Please read our Civil Litigation page for other stories on Counterfeit Goods.

The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002:

Crime doesn’t pay, but criminals will have to.
By Ms. Harpreet K. Bansal of IAN HENERY SOLICITORS LTD
The proceeds of crime act is a complex piece of legislation. The purpose of the legislation is to prevent any convicted criminal, charlatan or fraudster from financial benefitting from their behaviour or actions by any means. The legislation also allows the Court to investigate and peruse the affairs of the Defendant relating to all benefits from criminal conduct, and provide for the recovery of property which represents property through unlawful conduct. The aim of this article is to highlight key elements under POCA which would be well worth consideration by the Defendant, and his Legal team, as a method to protect himself before and at Trial.

Where financial gain is generated in any crime, often the Prosecution will invoke proceedings under The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA), with a view to recover all the monies obtained illegitimately and deprive the Defendant of all the ‘benefits’ which he falsely obtained. In the absence of a prosecution application, the Crown Court will intervene and order the confiscation of the benefit obtained by virtue of the criminal activity. The Defendant will be required to pay back the sum to the Government rather than pocket the gains himself.

POCA proceedings are very separate to the Trial and Sentence of a Defendant, and in some cases, more important than the Trial and/or sentence itself. Once a Defendant is convicted, either by pleading Guilty before Trial, or being found Guilty by a Jury after Trial, the Prosecution will almost always make an application for POCA proceedings to commence. Often the Defendant’s thoughts are concentrated on the preparation for Trial. However, as part of that preparation consideration should also be awarded to consequences, should the Defendant be found Guilty. Court Orders under POCA can be extremely draconian and should not be an afterthought in the Defendant's mind. This area is rather complex as there are a number of options available to a Court to convey the message ‘crime does not pay’; the options sought vary on a case by case basis.

In the lead up to the Trial, Prosecution can apply to the Crown Court for a restraint order, which prohibits the individual(s) concerned from dealing with the property in question until Trial i.e. bank accounts. Transactions in and out will be monitored, and the Defendant will only be allowed to withdraw and use a small, agreed sum, to cover basic household expenses. The Defendant can also be restrained from accessing, using, transferring, buying or selling any assets, shares, property or land before Trial.

After Trial, should the Defendant be found Guilty of the allegations made against him, sentence will be passed and proceedings under POCA will come into play and aim to strip the Defendant of all the benefits remotely associated with the crime. The Court will consider the Defendant’s whole life as a ‘crime in progress’, unless he can prove otherwise. The onus falls on the Defendant to prove that everything he currently owns and possesses was legitimately obtained and did not, in any way, shape or form, result from the crime he was convicted of.

The Defendant will also be required to identify and justify that his behaviour, actions and conduct in the preceeding six years from the date of conviction, were legitimate and do not represent property obtained through unlawful methods. A Defendant may be required to produce documentation such as receipts, invoices, bank statements, or even a Will, to verify legal ownership and that the Defendant did not obtain that item by way of the criminal activity he was convicted of.

Statute requires the Crown Court to consider whether the Defendant has a criminal lifestyle. There are certain offences which are listed in Schedule 2 of POCA which automatically infer a criminal lifestyle was adopted. This remains true even if is obvious or is agreed that it is the first offence which the Defendant has committed. The Act does not and will not spare any criminal.

  • consider the determination of the defendant’s ‘benefit’ in confiscation proceedings.
  • consider the difficulties arising when determining ‘particular criminal conduct’
  • look at how the court determines ‘general criminal conduct.’
  • look at the practical difficulties that can arise when trying to determine general criminal conduct.
  • discuss the issues arising when the court goes on to calculate the recoverable amount.
  • what safeguards exist to protect defendants from injustice in the confiscation process
  • look at the issues that arise from sentences in default of payment.


  • Understand how the defendant’s benefit from particular criminal conduct is determined;
  • Know how to determine a defendant’s pecuniary advantage;
  • Understand how the court interprets ‘obtaining property’;
  • Be aware of some of the difficulties that courts have faced when determining whether a defendant has benefited;
  • Understand how the court will apportion benefit in a criminal enterprise;
  • Be aware of some of the pertinent authorities on the topic.
March 2020
Seama Kapoor has been nominated for Best Legal Aid Lawyer in the Legal Aid Lawyer of the Year 2020 awards. The prestigious award is organised by the Legal Aid Practitioners Group and will be held later in the year.
March 2020
Elle May Macey has been nominated for Best Newcomer in Legal Aid Lawyer of the Year 2020. The prestigious award is organised by the Legal Aid Practitioners Group and will be held later in the year. Her nomination is supported by a Queen’s Counsel from Citadel Chambers.
Stacks Image 258450
Stacks Image 1241
Stacks Image 1247
Stacks Image 3
Stacks Image 35
Stacks Image 9
Stacks Image 12
Stacks Image 15
Stacks Image 18
© 2020 Ian Henery • Ian Henery Estate Agency Ltd • tel : 0121 6921898 Shimuzu Design