Latham J discussed the periods of sentence to be imposed in default of payment of a confiscation order: ‘The use of the words ‘the maximum period’ [in the statute] makes it quite plain that it was intended that these should indeed be maximum periods, in other words that the court when imposing a period of imprisonment in default was to have a discretion below that maximum period. Normally the court is likely to determine that the appropriate period in default will fall between the maximum for the band immediately below that which was being considered, and the band itself. In the present case the sum in question is the band of andpound;250,000 to andpound;1 million for which the appropriate maximum is five years’ imprisonment. The band next below it, which is andpound;100,000 to andpound;250,000 has a maximum of three years, so one would normally expect that the sentence would be between three and five years and would of course be determined in the exercise of the court’s discretion by reference to the amount which was in fact in question in the particular case.
In determining the right figure in default, we have to consider the circumstances of the case, the overall seriousness of the matter; but in particular we bear in mind that the purpose of the imposition of a period of imprisonment in default is to secure payment of the amount which the court has ordered to be confiscated. We consider that it is not necessarily appropriate to approach the case on a simple arithmetical basis, in other words providing a sort of ladder up the scale from three years to five years dependent on where within the band the confiscation order lies, otherwise Parliament would presumably have indicated that that was the way to do it by rather clearer definition in the scaling process.’
Judges:
Latham J
Citations:
(1994) 15 Cr App R (S) 821
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Pigott v Regina CACD 9-Nov-2009
The defendant appealed against a substantial confiscation order after his conviction for cheating the public revenue. He said that the judge had been biased or had shown the appearance of bias against him. He had given some assistance to the . .
Cited – Regina v Smith CACD 17-Feb-2009
Thomas LJ discussed the sentence to be imposed on default by the defendant in payment of a sum due under a confiscation order: ‘We turn therefore to the authorities which have been put before us in relation to the short issue. They are R v Szrajber . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Sentencing
Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.377791