Click the case name for better results:

Regina v October: CACD 27 Feb 2003

The court had adjourned its proceedings in the absence of the defendant, so as not to fall foul of the requirement that a confiscation inquiry must take place within six months of conviction. The defendant appealed. Held: The court could exercise its common law power to adjourn. The statutory power could only be exercised where … Continue reading Regina v October: CACD 27 Feb 2003

Regina v Metcalfe and Another: CACD 21 Dec 2004

The defendants appealed confiscation orders for drug trafficking where there had been a finding that of the tablets sold as ecstacy, probably only one tablet in a million was actually a class A controlled drug. Held:The Act required there to be shown that the defendant had ‘received any payment . . . . In connection … Continue reading Regina v Metcalfe and Another: CACD 21 Dec 2004

In re Woking Urban District Council (Basingstoke Canal) Act 1911: CA 1914

The court discussed why marginal notes are not to be used as an aid for stautory interpretation: ‘I am aware of the general rule of law as to marginal notes, at any rate in public general Acts of Parliament; but that rule is founded, as will be seen on reference to the cases, upon the … Continue reading In re Woking Urban District Council (Basingstoke Canal) Act 1911: CA 1914

Webb v The United Kingdom: ECHR 10 Feb 2004

The Court rejected the applicant’s contention that the proceedings involved a ‘criminal charge’ and resulted in the imposition of a penalty or punishment. The forfeiture was preventative and not a penal sanction. Accordingly it was permissible that, pursuant to section 43(3), the standard of proof required to justify forfeiture was that applicable to civil proceedings. … Continue reading Webb v The United Kingdom: ECHR 10 Feb 2004

Butler v United Kingdom: ECHR 27 Jun 2002

A substantial confiscation order was made with respect to money seized from the applicant on the ground that customs officers believed the money was directly or indirectly the proceeds of drugs trafficking and/or was intended for use in drug trafficking. The applicant contended that a court, when considering whether to make a forfeiture order in … Continue reading Butler v United Kingdom: ECHR 27 Jun 2002

Regina v Lingham: CACD 2 Jun 2000

Although a court normally has the power to determine when and how to deal with its own cases, a Crown Court dealing with an application for confiscation of assets under the Act, had to determine the case within the six month time limit unless it was satisfied that the circumstances were exceptional and an adjournment … Continue reading Regina v Lingham: CACD 2 Jun 2000

In Re P (Restraint Order) (Sale of Assets): CA 2 Aug 1999

An interim receiver under the Act was primarily appointed to preserve the assets of the defendant to prevent dissipation, and not to maximise them so as to realise greater sums for the purposes of any eventual confiscation order. He was answerable first to the court, and the court should not withdraw its control to such … Continue reading In Re P (Restraint Order) (Sale of Assets): CA 2 Aug 1999

Re Price: Admn 3 Nov 2006

Judges: Wilkie J Citations: [2006] EWHC 2751 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Drug Trafficking Act 1994, Criminal Justice Act 1988 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Criminal Sentencing Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.245977

Lloyd v Bow Street Magistrates Court: Admn 8 Oct 2003

The defendant had been convicted and made subect to a confiscation order in 1996. A final order for enforcement was made in late 2002. The defendant said the delay in the enforcement proceedings was a breach of his right to a trial within a reasonable time. Held: The reasonable time guarantee afforded by Article 6.1 … Continue reading Lloyd v Bow Street Magistrates Court: Admn 8 Oct 2003

Grayson and Barnham v The United Kingdom: ECHR 23 Sep 2008

Each applicant had been subject to confiscation in criminal proceedings relating to drugs offences. They complained that the legislation had reversed the burden of proof. Held: ‘it was not incompatible with the notion of a fair hearing in criminal proceedings to place the onus on each applicant to give a credible account of his current … Continue reading Grayson and Barnham v The United Kingdom: ECHR 23 Sep 2008

Telli v Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office: CA 21 Dec 2007

The appellant had completed that proportion of a total of 22 years’ imprisonment, which he was required to serve for drug trafficking offences. But he remained in prison serving a default term for failure to pay the whole of the sum of pounds 3,458,806, which he was required to pay by virtue of a confiscation … Continue reading Telli v Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office: CA 21 Dec 2007

Westminster City Council v National Asylum Support Service: HL 17 Oct 2002

The applicant sought assistance from the local authority. He suffered from spinal myeloma, was destitute and an asylum seeker. Held: Although the Act had withdrawn the obligation to provide assistance for many asylum seekers, those who were infirm and whose infirmity was not a consequence of their destitution, had not been excluded. Only able bodied … Continue reading Westminster City Council v National Asylum Support Service: HL 17 Oct 2002

Regina v Magro: CACD 8 Jul 2010

Each defendant appealed against confiscation orders made when the sentence imposed was an absolute or conditional discharge. They said that Clarke made such orders unlawful. Held: The decision in Clarke was a difficult limitation on the court’s discretion: ‘there are cases in which the combination of an order for discharge with a confiscation order represents … Continue reading Regina v Magro: CACD 8 Jul 2010

HH v Deputy Prosecutor of The Italian Republic, Genoa: SC 20 Jun 2012

In each case the defendant sought to resist European Extradition Warrants saying that an order would be a disporportionate interference in their human right to family life. The Court asked whether its approach as set out in Norris, had to be amended in the light of the case of ZH. Held: HH and PH’s appeals … Continue reading HH v Deputy Prosecutor of The Italian Republic, Genoa: SC 20 Jun 2012

Roberts v Parole Board: HL 7 Jul 2005

Balancing Rights of Prisoner and Society The appellant had been convicted of the murder of three police officers in 1966. His tariff of thirty years had now long expired. He complained that material put before the Parole Board reviewing has case had not been disclosed to him. Held: The appeal failed (by a majority). The … Continue reading Roberts v Parole Board: HL 7 Jul 2005

Regina v Isleworth Crown Court ex parte Marland: Admn 28 Oct 1997

A previous conviction of the defendant for a drugs related offence was admissible on a civil application for the forfeiture of cash said to represent the proceeds of drug trafficking under the section 43(1). The court observed that the circumstances in which similar fact evidence would be admitted in a criminal trial were closely circumscribed … Continue reading Regina v Isleworth Crown Court ex parte Marland: Admn 28 Oct 1997

Hallam, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 30 Jan 2019

These appeals concern the statutory provisions governing the eligibility for compensation of persons convicted of a criminal offence where their conviction is subsequently quashed (or they are pardoned) because of the impact of fresh evidence. It was argued that the failure to make payment amounted to a denial of the right to the presumption of … Continue reading Hallam, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 30 Jan 2019

Gale and Another v Serious Organised Crime Agency: SC 26 Oct 2011

Civil recovery orders had been made against the applicant. He had been accused and acquitted of drug trafficking allegations in Europe, but the judge had been persuaded that he had no proper explanation for the accumulation of his wealth, and had rejected his evidence as unreliable. Held: The defendant’s appeal failed. The making of an … Continue reading Gale and Another v Serious Organised Crime Agency: SC 26 Oct 2011

A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2): HL 8 Dec 2005

Evidence from 3rd Party Torture Inadmissible The applicants had been detained following the issue of certificates issued by the respondent that they posed a terrorist threat. They challenged the decisions of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission saying that evidence underlying the decisions had probably been obtained by torture committed by foreign powers, and should not … Continue reading A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2): HL 8 Dec 2005

Grant v The Queen: PC 16 Jan 2006

(Jamaica) The defendant appealed his conviction for murder saying that the admission of an unsworn statement by one witness and the non-admission of another similar statement who did not either attend court was unconstitutional. He shot the victim 13 times with hollow point bullets. He claimed self defence, and drove straight to the police station … Continue reading Grant v The Queen: PC 16 Jan 2006

Assets Recovery Agency v Olupitan and Another: QBD 8 Feb 2007

The claimant was responsible for recovering money under the 2002 Act, and alleged that the first defendant had been engaged in a mortgage fraud. Held: To succeed in such a claim for recovery the Claimant must prove, ‘on a balance of probabilities’, that the matters alleged to constitute unlawful conduct occurred. The court had a … Continue reading Assets Recovery Agency v Olupitan and Another: QBD 8 Feb 2007

Regina v Davies: CACD 22 May 2001

The judge when sentencing the offender set a timetable for the purpose of determinations under the 1994 Act, requiring disclosure of assets and expenditure by the defendant within 28 days and a prosecutor’s statement within 28 days thereafter. Held: Nevertheless, there had been a breach of section 3 because the court had failed to specify … Continue reading Regina v Davies: CACD 22 May 2001

Ginwalla, Regina v: CACD 8 Dec 2005

[2005] EWCA Crim 3553 Bailii Drug Trafficking Act 1994 31(4) England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Gibson v Revenue and Customs Prosecution Office CA 12-Jun-2008 The claimant’s husband had been made subject to a criminal confiscation order in the sum of pounds 5.5 million. She now sought to appeal an action against life policies … Continue reading Ginwalla, Regina v: CACD 8 Dec 2005

Gibson v Revenue and Customs Prosecution Office: CA 12 Jun 2008

The claimant’s husband had been made subject to a criminal confiscation order in the sum of pounds 5.5 million. She now sought to appeal an action against life policies in which she claimed a 50% interest. Held: Despite the finding that she had some awareness of her husband’s activities, the claimant was entitled to keep … Continue reading Gibson v Revenue and Customs Prosecution Office: CA 12 Jun 2008

Gora and others v Commissioners of Customs and Excise and others: CA 11 Apr 2003

The appellants challenged decisions of the VAT and Duties Tribunal after seizure of their goods, and in particular whether the cases had been criminal or civil cases and following Roth, whether the respondent’s policy had been lawful and proportionate. Held: The present procedure does not involve the criminal courts and the absence of any criminal … Continue reading Gora and others v Commissioners of Customs and Excise and others: CA 11 Apr 2003

Regina v Parole Board ex parte Smith, Regina v Parole Board ex parte West (Conjoined Appeals): HL 27 Jan 2005

Each defendant challenged the way he had been treated on revocation of his parole licence, saying he should have been given the opportunity to make oral representations. Held: The prisoners’ appeals were allowed. Lord Bingham stated: ‘While an oral hearing is most obviously necessary to achieve a just decision in a case where facts are … Continue reading Regina v Parole Board ex parte Smith, Regina v Parole Board ex parte West (Conjoined Appeals): HL 27 Jan 2005

H M Customs and Excise and Another v MCA and Another; A v A; Re MCA: CA 22 Jul 2002

The husband and wife divorced and a property adjustment order applied for. The husband had been convicted and a drugs proceeds order made under the 1994 Act. The order had not been satisfied, and the receiver applied for money from the matrimonial property. Held: The two Acts gave no indication that either was to take … Continue reading H M Customs and Excise and Another v MCA and Another; A v A; Re MCA: CA 22 Jul 2002

Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others: HL 17 Oct 2002

The applicants had been made subject of anti-social behaviour orders. They challenged the basis upon which the orders had been made. Held: The orders had no identifiable consequences which would make the process a criminal one. Civil standards of evidence therefore applied, and hearsay evidence was admissible. Nevertheless, the test as to whether it was … Continue reading Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others: HL 17 Oct 2002

Chandler (TN) v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 12 Jul 1962

The defendants appealed from conviction for offences under the 1911 Act. They were supporters of an organisation seeking to prevent nuclear war, and entered an Air Force base attempting to obtain information they would later publish. They pursued a campaign of non-violent civil disobedience. The judge had refused to allow cross examination and evidence concerning … Continue reading Chandler (TN) v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 12 Jul 1962

Crown Prosecution Service v Richards and Richards: CA 27 Jun 2006

The court was asked how to resolve the conflict between a public policy imperative to deprive offenders of the fruits of their crime and the requirement that dependants are provided for after divorce when the only funds available for both are the same? The CPS appealed against an order distributing a capital sum to the … Continue reading Crown Prosecution Service v Richards and Richards: CA 27 Jun 2006

Pickstone v Freemans Plc: HL 30 Jun 1988

The claimant sought equal pay with other, male, warehouse operatives who were doing work of equal value but for more money. The Court of Appeal had held that since other men were also employed on the same terms both as to pay and work, her claim failed. Held: The claim was not disbarred in this … Continue reading Pickstone v Freemans Plc: HL 30 Jun 1988

Sekhon, etc v Regina: CACD 16 Dec 2002

The defendants appealed against confiscation orders on the basis that in various ways, the Crown had failed to comply with procedural requirements. Held: The courts must remember the importance of such procedures in the fight against crime, and must not allow procedural or technical failures to defeat that purpose. Courts should rather look to see … Continue reading Sekhon, etc v Regina: CACD 16 Dec 2002

Regina v Latif; Regina v Shahzad: HL 23 Jan 1996

The defendant had been lured into the UK by the unlawful acts of customs officers. He claimed abuse of process. Held: The category of cases in which the abuse of process principles can be applied is not closed. A customs officer committing an offence alongside the defendant did not necessarily make thereby make a prosecution … Continue reading Regina v Latif; Regina v Shahzad: HL 23 Jan 1996

Briggs-Price, Regina v: HL 29 Apr 2009

The applicant appealed against a confiscation order made on the basis of evidence obtained for and given in a trial that he had profited from the importation of cannabis. He had not faced trial on an associated charge, but had been convicted of conspiracy on the importation of heroin. Held: The court need not rely … Continue reading Briggs-Price, Regina v: HL 29 Apr 2009

Regina v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and another, ex parte European Roma Rights Centre and others: HL 9 Dec 2004

Extension oh Human Rights Beyond Borders The appellants complained that the system set up by the respondent where Home Office officers were placed in Prague airport to pre-vet applicants for asylum from Romania were dsicriminatory in that substantially more gypsies were refused entry than others, and that it was contrary to the obligations of the … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and another, ex parte European Roma Rights Centre and others: HL 9 Dec 2004

A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004

The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they did. A British subject, who was suspected in the exact same way, and there were … Continue reading A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004

Regina v Green: HL 14 May 2008

The appellant had been found to have received criminal proceeds along with another. He appealed against an order making him liable for the full amount. Held: The appeal failed. The defendant’s argument did not face the finding that he had been acting jointly with his co-defendants. ‘The committee cannot, however, regard it as disproportionate to … Continue reading Regina v Green: HL 14 May 2008

Brown and Others v InnovatorOne Plc and Others: ComC 19 Jun 2009

The claimants served proceedings by fax. The defendants denied that it was effective saying that they had not confirmed that they were instructed to accept service or that as required by the rules they had confirmed that they would accept service by fax. Held: The service had not been valid. The claimant effectively argued for … Continue reading Brown and Others v InnovatorOne Plc and Others: ComC 19 Jun 2009

Regina v Cole: CACD 22 Apr 1998

The defendant having been convicted of drug offences was subject to an application for confiscation of his assets. For various reasons, including the illness of the judge, the decision was not made within the 6 month period. The court held that the . .