Facts: 

Application by the prosecution to strike out the accused's appeal. The accused reasoned that the dismissal of his request for the release of funds seized during the execution of a search warrant violated his rights.

The police had seized the sum of US$56,000 from the accused's vehicle. The search was part of an investigation which led to the accused being charged with two offences violating the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. The accused sought the release of all or part of the seized funds to cover his reasonable legal expenses given that he had been rejected for legal aid and his legal counsel was representing him on a pro bono basis. The applications judge dismissed the accused's application for the release of the funds as he was not prepared to draw an inference that the accused had established a legitimate possession of the funds so as to reduce the concern that the funds were the proceeds of crime. The accused sought to appeal the decision on the basis that the applications judge erred in considering the legitimacy of his possession of the funds given that it was not contested by the prosecution and that the only issue for consideration was the state of his financial affairs as it affected his need to pay counsel fees from the seized funds.

Main Issue:

Possibility to appeal against a decision by the application judge, seeking to release of all or part of the seized funds to cover the accused's reasonable legal expenses.