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, whether or not the information gathering process had been completed, an extension of time … Continue reading Regina v Shevki and Another: CACD 14 Dec 2000
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 postponement having been made in open court by the judge within the period, … Continue reading Regina v Cole: CACD 22 Apr 1998
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
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 . .
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
Judges: Goldring J Citations: [2005] EWHC 2641 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Drug Trafficking Act 1994 43(1) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Criminal Sentencing Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.235196
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
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
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
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
