A police and Revenue and Customs (HMRC) operation targeted brothers Arif Patel, Munaf Patel and Faisal Patel and companies they control.

The investigation related to counterfeit goods and a money laundering scam. Eight warrants were issued on March 31, 2008, and one on April 3, by Judge Robert Brown at Preston Crown Court.

Executed on April 3, police searched the offices of Hill Dickinson LLP – a solicitors in St Paul's Square, Liverpool – and those of accountants, Hindocha & Co in Harewood Road, Preston.

They also searched Faisal House in Fulwood – premises of Faisaltex Ltd, Faisaltex Manufacturing Ltd and Faisal Imports Ltd – and Patel family homes.

Lord Justice Keene said that between March 2004 and April 2007 HMRC seized 39 consignments of clothing imported into the UK, all of which contained quantities of counterfeit items.

He said documentation found with the goods related "allegedly" to companies owned and operated by members of the Patel family, or companies that could be linked to them.

"The 39 consignments are regarded by police and HMRC as a very small proportion of such consignments," the judge said.

He added that HMRC were also investigating alleged false export declarations, which enabled the exporter to reclaim VAT, with losses to the revenue of £45m.

When Judge Brown issued the warrants he was told there was reason to believe a number of criminal offences had been committed.

The brothers, as well as the three companies based at Faisal House, and accountant Anil Hindocha, trading as Hindocha & Co, launched a High Court challenge, arguing the warrants were unlawfully issued and, when executed, the police seized an "excessive" amount of material and acted "oppressively".

Lord Justice Keene agreed that the warrant granted against Hill Dickinson, who were not a party to the High Court case, should not have been issued, saying there was no "rational basis" for Judge Brown to have done so.

He said investigating officers were worried potentially crucial files could be removed from the "reputable" firm's offices, but said they had a "statutory duty" not to allow that to happen, and saw no reason to believe it would have.

But he upheld Judge Brown's decision to issue the other warrants. Having seen a video of the searches, he dismissed claims that police officers acted in an "oppressive" way.

He dismissed suggestions too much material was seized and applications to have all property seized returned were refused. Documents taken from Hill Dickinson, however, must be returned.

A spokesman for Lancashire police said: "We note the decision of the court with regard to one particular warrant and we understand the reasons behind the judgment, but overall we are more than satisfied with the outcome of the hearing."

Arif Patel said: "The fight is ongoing... justice will prevail."

>> Vote in our latest web poll

>> Have your say on our special traffic and travel rantline