The applicant was arrested and placed under house arrest on charges relating to his association with the Mafia. As an interim measure some of his property was seized. The proceedings ended in his acquittal. He claimed that the seizure of his property was a violation of his rights under A1P1. Held: His complaint was dismissed.The … Continue reading Raimondo v Italy: ECHR 22 Feb 1994
The appellant was charged with conspiracy to traffic in a dangerous drug, contrary to the common law and section 4 of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance Cap 134 of Hong Kong. The prosecution said he had had meetings in Thailand with a man named Needham. who unknown to the appellant was an US undercover drug enforcement … Continue reading Yip Chiu Cheung v Regina: PC 16 Jun 1994
The defendant appealed against a confiscation order, challenging the standard of proof applied by the judge. Held: The judge was entitled to include in his consideration, the evidence given at the trial as well as that on the confiscation application. He was to apply the civil standard of proof. That power was in 71(7A), which … Continue reading Regina v Levin: CACD 29 Jan 2004
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
No guideline for laundering of proceeds of drugs – too wide variation. . .
Renewed application for permission to appeal a decision refusing the applicant’s application for a certificate of inadequacy under section 17 of the Drug Trafficking Act 1994. . .
The Customs appealed an order allowing a judge in divorce ancillary relief proceedings to make an order transferring the matrimonial home and two life policies in such a way as would defeat their attempt to enforce recovery under the 1994 Act. Held: The customs had not established that the 1994 had any statutory priority. Both … Continue reading Commissioners of Customs and Excise v A: A v A: CA 22 Jul 2002
The defendant appealed against a confiscation order made under the drug trafficking legislation. The judge had made a finding that there would be a serious chance of unfairness in the order but had continued nonetheless, by reducing the relative proportion ordered. Held: It could not be the law that if the judge found a serious … Continue reading Regina v Deprince: CACD 9 Mar 2004
The claimants sought return of vehicle parts from the police. The police replied that the goods had been tampered with in such a way as to suggest they may have been stolen, and that they were therefore kept, even after the finish of the court procedings against the claimants, to ascertain their ownership under the … Continue reading Gough and Another v The Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police: CA 2 Mar 2004
The claimant company said that the 2010 Act was outside the competence of the Scottish Parliament insofar as it severely restricted the capacity of those selling cigarettes to display them for sale. They suggested two faults. First, that the subject matters were reserved to the UK Parliament under the 1998 Act. Second that the Act … Continue reading Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate: SC 12 Dec 2012
Statutory provisions which reversed the burden of proof in cases involving drug smuggling and other repeat offenders, allowing confiscation orders to be made were not necessarily in contravention of the article 6 right. However the question of whether the statutory provision infringed the right to a fair trial was for each particular case which came … Continue reading Regina v Benjafield, Regina v Leal, Regina v Rezvi, Regina v Milford: HL 24 Jan 2002
Having been convicted of theft, a confiscation order had been made against which the appellant appealed. The Court of Appeal certified a question of whether confiscation provisions under the 1988 Act were in breach of the defendant’s human rights. Are applications for confiscation orders criminal proceedings under the Convention, and if so do the assumptions … Continue reading Regina v Rezvi: HL 24 Jan 2002
The applicants had either been acquitted of drugs trafficking offences, or were third parties. In each case, property had been taken into receivership, and orders had been made for the receivers to take their costs from the assets taken. The proprietors appealed that part of the orders. Held: The receiver is an officer of the … Continue reading Hughes and Others v HM Customs and Excise: Admn 21 Dec 2001
Having been convicted of drug trafficking, an application was made for a confiscation under the 1994 Act. On the civil balance of proof, and applying the assumptions under the Act, an order was made. The applicant claimed that his article 6 rights had been infringed. The respondent government said the application for an order was … Continue reading Phillips v United Kingdom: ECHR 5 Jul 2001
Where an electricity supplier operated a waste plant to generate electricity, but still, the predominant use of the plant was for waste disposal, the rates were not to be calculated under the industry’s own special rules, but under those for the general rating of business premises. An explanatory note may be referred to as an … Continue reading Coventry and Solihull Waste Disposal Company Ltd v Russell: HL 25 Nov 1999
Lord Woolf MR said that where the original proceedings are brought by a public authority, an appeal is part of those proceedings to which section 22(4) applies: ‘In our judgment, where the original proceedings are brought by, or at the instigation of, a public authority, as is the case with a prosecution, an appeal by … Continue reading Regina v Benjafield, Leal, Rezvi and Milford: CACD 21 Dec 2000
The defendant admitted conspiring to supply cannabis on the basis that he had derived no financial benefit from his involvement in the conspiracy, although he had been promised andpound;200 for his role in transporting a sum of money for the purchase of the drugs. He had also driven a van in which the drugs were … Continue reading Regina v Lunnon: CACD 2004
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
For a site supplying several services including waste management and lesser electricity generation, the primary purpose governed its rating, and the site did not have the exemptions from commercial rates which were allowed to generator sites. An explanatory note may be referred to as an aid to construction where the statutory instrument to which it … Continue reading Russell v Coventry and Solihull Waste Disposal Co Ltd: CA 11 Jun 1998
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
The defendants had been charged with four conspiracies, each of which was indicted as a conspiracy to commit offences under the 1994 Act on the one hand and under the 1988 Act on the other. The crown accepted that for a conviction for the laundering of the proceeds of drug trafficking, it was necessary to … Continue reading Regina v El-Kurd: CACD 2001
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
A confiscation order was to be made. The judge included the purchase price of the drugs forfeited. Held: As the drugs had been forfeited they were no longer the property of the former owner. So he was in no position to realise that property as an asset. Lord Bingham CJ said: ‘But even if the … Continue reading Regina v Dore: CACD 19 Dec 1996
Two women parties used funds generated by a joint business venture to buy a house in which they lived together. It was vested in the sole name of the plaintiff but on the understanding that they were joint beneficial owners. The purpose of the arrangement was so that false benefit claims could be made to … Continue reading Tinsley v Milligan: HL 28 Jun 1993
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
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
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
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
Judges: Sir John Thomas P, Cox, Kenneth Parker Jj Citations:  EWCA Crim 2437,  2 All ER 121,  Crim LR 415,  1 WLR 2014,  WLR(D) 332,  1 Cr App R 21 Links: Bailii, WLRD Statutes: Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 29, Drug Trafficking Act 1994 15 Jurisdiction: England and … Continue reading YDG and Another, Regina v: CACD 20 Nov 2012
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
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
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
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
Appeal against conviction for entering into an arrangement for the retention of criminal funds. The defendant said that at the time of the arrangement there were not yet any criminal funds in existence. A had set up websites intending to con visitors selling non-existent cut price insurance. B opened bank accounts for A to be … Continue reading GH, Regina v: SC 22 Apr 2015
It does not necessarily follow from the mere possession of drugs that a person is not a mere minder or custodian Lord Woolf of Barnes LCJ, Rougier, Bell JJ  EWCA Crim 115,  1 Cr App R (S) 79 Bailii Drug Trafficking Act 1994 2 Cited by: Cited – Mackle, Regina v SC 29-Jan-2014 … Continue reading Regina v J: CACD 4 Jul 2000
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
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
 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
The defendant had been convicted of drugs offences, and sentenced under the 1994 Act. The gains he had made exceeded his then assets. Later he acquired further property honestly, and the Court now considered whether those assets could be taken to cover the earlier shortfall, by allowing for them when issuing a certificate to increase … Continue reading Peacock, Re: SC 22 Feb 2012
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
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
The defendant had been convicted of involvement in a substantial VAT fraud, and made subject to a confiscation order. He was made subject to a confiscation order in respect of the amounts lost to the fraud where he was involved, but argued that the court had made each of 16 defendants liable for the full … Continue reading May, Regina v: HL 14 May 2008
The defendant appealed against confiscation orders made under the 2002 Act. He had bought a flat with a substantial deposit from his own resources, and the balance from a lender. That lender was repaid after he took a replacement loan. He was later convicted of having misled the first lender in his application. The judge … Continue reading Waya, Regina v: SC 14 Nov 2012
The court considered the proper approach for the court to adopt, and the proper orders for the court to make, in confiscation proceedings where a number of criminals (some of whom may not be before the court) had between them acquired property or money as a result of committing an offence for which all or … Continue reading Ahmad, Regina v: SC 18 Jun 2014
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
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
The claimant sought to assert race discrimination by the Labour Party in not selecting him as a political candidate. The defendant, chairman of the party appealed.
Held: A political party when selecting candidates was not acting as a . .
The defendants had been arrested as they unloaded four tons of cannabis from a boat.
Held: Their appeal against a confiscation order was allowed despite the acceptance of a statement when the acceptance had been based on a mistake of law or . .
The court was asked to say how it was to be shown that the defendant had profited from drug trafficking.
Held: It was for the prosecution to establish to the civil standard that the defendant had made payments out of the funds alleged to have . .
The two defendants appealed against the increase of compensation orders made to reflect assets received properly after their original sentencing. . .
(From High Court of Justiciary (Scotland)) The defendant had been convicted of drug trafficking. He complained that the following confiscation order had infringed his human rights being based an assumption of guilt and which was incompatible with . .
The appellant had been sentenced to 5 years imprisonment and a confiscation order pounds 5.4m with six years in default. Small payments were made later by his receivers, but the interest had taken the total sums due over pounds 8m at the time of . .
The court held that they were not precluded by an application made under the 1994 Act against assets of the husband from making an order in favour of the wife under the 1973 Act. The court discharged the Receiver appointed under section 29(2) DTA . .
Although the rules specified that a form should be used when making application to extend the time for which money could be held pending an application under the Act for its forfeiture, there was no enforceable duty to prove that the form had been . .
The conversion of cash from one currency into another can of itself constitute the offence of facilitating the retention or control of the benefits of drug trafficking irrespective of the purpose of the conversion. The words in the statute are not . .
In assessment of proceeds of drug trafficking, court not to treat money launderers as a special case despite statutory distinction. . .
When considering a confiscation order which would affect the wife of the accused, and where property is held in joint names, the court should start with the prima facie position as to where the beneficial interests lay and then go on to find whether . .
The making of a confiscation order is part of sentencing. Such an order might be delayed provided the determination was made within six months of conviction. If in the circumstances of the case of an adjournment beyond that period was necessary, . .
The defendant had been made the subject of a confiscation order. He appealed, saying that in calculating the assets, he had taken the gross value of his property without allowing for an outstanding mortgage.
Held: The mortgage advance was not . .
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 . .
The Crown appealed a decision that a conviction under subsection 2 required proof that the money the disposal of which the defendant was accused to have assisted was in fact the proceeds of drug trafficking.
Held: Subsections 1 and 2 were . .
This is an appeal on preliminary points of European Union and domestic law regarding the circumstances in which damages may be recoverable for failure to comply with the requirements of the Public Procurement Directive (Parliament and Council . .
The defendants faced charges under the two Acts. They raised as a preliminary issue whether it is necessary for the Crown to prove that the property being converted was in fact the proceeds, in the case of the 1994 Act, of drug trafficking and, in . .
The defendant appealed aganst his conviction for conspiracy to engage in moneylaundering. At trial he pleaded guilty subject to a qualification that he had not known that the money was the proceeds of crime, though he may have suspected that it . .
The husband had been convicted of trafficking in cannabis, and an order had been made confiscating his assets. His wife had already petitioned for divorce and begun ancillary relief proceedings. She claimed that her interest in the house under . .
Valuation of drugs in confiscation order.
Applying the 1994 Act, sections 2(3) and 4(1) were directed to gross payments and not net profits. . .
The defendant appealed against a forfeiture order, saying that it had been made under the 1990 Act which had been repealed.
Held: The wrong naming of the section did not invalidate the decision. . .
The defendant appealed his sentence for conspiracy to supply counterfeit drugs.
Held: The defendant need only serve the sentence if he failed to pay a penalty which the court had decided he could afford to pay. Appeal dismissed. . .
Four defendants appealed convictions in money laundering cases. The first defendant operated a money exchange through which substantial volumes of cash were moved, but claimed that he believed the money to have been honestly acquired.
Held: . .
The several defendants complained at the use at their trials of evidence given anonymously. The perceived need for anonymity arose because, from intimidation, the witnesses would not be willing to give their evidence without it.
Held: The . .
The defendants appealed against their convictions for conspiracy to launder money under section 49(2) of the 1994 Act. The appellants said that the effect of the decision in Montila, alongside sections 1(1) and 1(2) of the 1997 Act, was that a . .
The defendant appealed his convictions for robbery. He had been subject to a dock identification, and he complained that the prosecution had failed in its duties of disclosure.
Held: The combination of several failings meant that the defendant . .
The three defendants were stopped on their way to Malaga. Each carried andpound;7,000 or andpound;6,000. Their explanations were not accepted, and the money was seized under the Act. The magistrates ordered it to be returned, and Customs appealed. . .
The defendant was subject to a confiscation order. The judge had postponed the determination of the amount, but without specifying when it would take place.
Held: The requirement in the Act was mandatory. When deciding to postpone an . .