A man and two women facing dissident terrorist charges have lost a High Court challenge to having their bank accounts frozen.
Damien McLaughlin, Sharon Jordan and Amanda Duffy claimed it was an invalid move taken as part of a major investigation into New IRA activities.
Judicial review proceedings were issued against the Chief Constable and a District Judge who granted the freezing orders under the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001.
Lawyers for the trio argued that police failed to comply with a legal obligation to consult with HM Treasury before making the applications in Belfast earlier this year.
Ruling on the case, Mr Justice Colton said the legislation gave sweeping and "arguably draconian" powers to the authorities.
He accepted there had not been precise compliance with the Act, but noted that Treasury was consulted on a similar previous process at Westminster Magistrates' Court.
"Undoubtedly, the making of the applications is prejudicial to the applicants," the judge acknowledged.
"However, the failure to consult has had no identifiable prejudicial effect on the substance of the applications and the subsequent orders of the court."
McLaughlin, 45, Jordan, 46, and 50-year-old Duffy, also known as Amanda McCabe, are all currently in custody accused of terrorist offences linked to the joint police and MI5 Operation Arbacia.
They are among ten people to be charged in the surveillance-led offensive targeting the New IRA.
The probe involved bugging two suspected meetings in Co Tyrone last year.
In May police obtained freezing orders against 20 bank and credit union accounts at courts in Belfast and London.
McLaughlin, Jordan and Duffy contested the legality of the steps taken in Northern Ireland.
Defence lawyers claimed issues around consultation rendered the original orders unlawful.
But Mr Justice Colton held: "This is not a case where the applicants are saying the substantive grounds for the making of the order have not been made out, as a result of a failure to consult."
Dismissing the challenges, he concluded: "In these circumstances notification by both the Metropolitan Police Service and the PSNI in the terms referred to earlier to HM Treasury was appropriate."