Whether the seizure of parcels nos. 68 and 69 was justified as assets probably derived from an offence or needed as security.
The seizure was justified because there were sufficient indications that K._______ SA had been constituted with funds originating from criminal proceeds.
The court found that W. had used money paid by the complainants, via the account used for construction payments, to finance K._______ SA and fully liberate its capital. The parcels had been contributed in kind to that company, and the company did not oppose the seizure. Under Art. 223 para. 1 CPP and Art. 223a CPP, seizure was therefore permissible and also compatible with potential confiscation under Art. 70 CP.