Several of the defendants applied for assets to be excluded from an interim receiving order in order to enable them to meet legal expenses. Judges: Henderson J Citations: [2009] EWHC 344 (Ch), [2010] 1 WLR 1316, [2010] Bus LR 689 Links: Bailii Statutes: Proceeds of Crime Act 2000 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also … Continue reading Serious Organised Crime Agency v Szepietowski and others: ChD 27 Feb 2009
An application for a confiscation order following a drugs trial, was subject to the requirement of a presumption of innocence. The assumptions required of a court under the Act as to the source of assets acquired by the convicted person violated that presumption of innocence. The section required nothing of the Crown to even suggest … Continue reading Mcintosh v HM Advocate: HCJ 31 Oct 2000
The defendant had defrauded women of in excess of pounds 500,000. He admitted dishonesty. The court ordered confiscation under the 1988 Act, with the benefit assessed as that figure, adjusted to pounds 600,000 to allow for the return he should have made. No assets were traced, and the police said that he had hidden it, … Continue reading Barwick, Regina v: CACD 13 Oct 2000
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
The appellant had pleaded guilty to three offences of conspiracy to defraud by inflating invoices for goods supplied. The first of those offences took place at a time between January 1995 and October 2006; the second between January 1995 and June . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
The defendant had had set aside an interim order for assets recovery. The director appealed against a finding by the court below that he did not have ‘a good arguable case’, justifying an interim recovery order. Held: The appeal succeeded. On an interim order, the director had to establish a good arguable case that a … Continue reading Assets Recovery Agency v Szepietowski and others: CA 24 Jul 2007
(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 his article 6 rights. The first question was whether he remained a person ‘charged with a criminal offence’. … Continue reading Her Majesty’s Advocate and Another v Mcintosh: PC 5 Feb 2001
The appellant had been convicted of causing death by careless driving with excess alcohol. He said that he had taken alcohol after stopping driving but before being tested. He challenged the weight of the burden of proof ascribed by the statute. The judge had directed the jury that he faced a persuasive burden of establishing … Continue reading Drummond v Regina: CACD 7 Mar 2002
The defendant appealed a conviction of possession of 66 grams of cannabis with intent to supply. Also found were a large number of small bags and pounds 7,000 in cash. The defendant said the cannabis was for his personal use, and the equipment had been left at the house. He also complained of the mention … Continue reading Payton, Regina v: CACD 26 May 2006
The CPS was asked to provide information about its civil recovery functions under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. It refused, citing the exemption at section 35(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. The Commissioner concluded that whilst section 35(1)(a) was engaged by the information, the public interest did not support withholding the information … Continue reading Crown Prosecution Service (Decision Notice): ICO 28 Jun 2010
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 clearly differently worded. Under section 1 it was necessary to prove that the goods … Continue reading Regina v Montilla, Newbury etc: CACD 3 Nov 2003
The court considered the defence of diminished responsibility to a charge of murder. Held: Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: ‘It is, of course, impossible to attempt to describe the ambit of the doctrine of diminished responsibility without even attempting to describe the operation of the doctrine itself. A common theme in the cases where judges have … Continue reading Scarsbrook or Galbraith v Her Majesty’s Advocate (No.2): HCJ 21 Jun 2001
The court considered the effect of the decision in Clarke, and concluded that if the court is not permitted to make a confiscation order together with an order for conditional discharge, it may then become necessary to impose a different, more punitive sentence, rather than the order for conditional discharge, because without the order for … Continue reading Wilkinson, Regina v: CACD 11 Dec 2009
The defendants were to be tried for allegedly sending funds abroad to support terrorism. The court now considered the meaning of the phrase ‘reasonable cause to suspect’ in the context of the anticipated use of the funds: ‘Does it mean that the accused must actually suspect, and for reasonable cause, that the money may be … Continue reading Lane and Another, Regina v: SC 11 Jul 2018
The defendant had pleaded guilty to concealing criminal property. He was conditionally discharged but also made subject to a confiscation order. He appealed saying that one could not be made if only a conditional discharge was imposed. Held: The defendant’s appeal succeeded. The court examined the history of the conditional discharge provided by counsel, and … Continue reading Clarke v Regina: CACD 12 Jun 2009
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 would be. Held: (Baroness Hale of Richmond dissenting) The appeal succeeded: ‘the Crown’s principal … Continue reading Saik, Regina v: HL 3 May 2006
The claimant government sought the return to it of historical artefacts in the possession of the defendants. The defendant said the claimant could not establish title and that if it could the title under which the claim was made was punitive and not to be applied by English law. Held: It is necessary for a … Continue reading Iran v The Barakat Galleries Ltd: QBD 29 Mar 2007
The defendants, accused of offences under the 2000 Act, appealed an interim finding that documents stored on computers could amount to ‘articles’ within the Act. They said that the existence of sections 57 and 58 suggested two distinct regimes, one for documents, and one for articles. Held: The district judge should have followed Rowe. The … Continue reading M, Regina v; Regina v Z; Regina v I; Regina v R; Regina v B (No 2): CACD 27 Apr 2007
The applicant challenged the exercise of a power of sale under a mortgage, saying that the mortgagee’s purposes included purposes not those under the mortgage. The parties had been involved in an attempted development of a penthouse. Held: The power was validly exercised. Provided the recovery of the sums for which the security was given … Continue reading Meretz Investments Nv and Another v ACP Ltd and others: ChD 30 Jan 2006
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 had not received a fair trial, and the appeal was allowed. The practice of dock identification was … Continue reading Holland v Her Majesty’s Advocate (Devolution): PC 11 May 2005
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 defendants had had confiscation orders made against them. They had appealed on the basis that the orders were made more than six months after sentence. The prosecutor now appealed saying that the fact that the order were not timely did not invalidate them. Held: The appeal was allowed. The confiscation orders made by the … Continue reading Regina v Soneji and Bullen: HL 21 Jul 2005
After conviction for benefits fraud, the defendant appealed a confiscation order, saying that had he made appropriate claims for state benefirs under other heads, the loss to the state would have been much less (andpound;3000 not andpound;19,000). Held: The defendant was unable to set off against the amount ordered to be paid any sum which … Continue reading Department for Works and Pensions v Richards; Regina v Richards (Michael): CACD 3 Mar 2005
Restraint and Disclosure orders had been made on without notice applications at the request of South Africa. The applicant appealed a refusal of their discharge. Held: Such orders did not apply to the applicant’s assets in Scotland. The orders were quashed and new orders substituted restricting their ambit to England and Wales. Judges: Lord Justice … Continue reading King v The Serious Fraud Office: CACD 18 Mar 2008
The defendant appealed conviction on three counts of conspiracy to launder money. The prosecution said that he and his co-accused engaged in money laundering between June 1999 and March 2000. Each count alleged that he and his co-conspirators engaged in transactions which were prohibited by section 49(2)(b) of the Drug Trafficking Act 1994 and section … Continue reading Regina v Gulbir Rana Singh: CACD 18 Dec 2003
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 defendant was convicted of an offence to which section 15 of the Theft Act did not apply. It involved a deception of the auditors of BCCI in concealing a number of substantial loans made to a group of companies run by the defendant. Buxton J had considered that Rees was confined to its own … Continue reading Abbas Kassimali Gokal v Serious Fraud Office: CA 16 Mar 2001
The parties had lived together in a house owned in the defendant’s name and in which she claimed an interest. The claimant’s solicitors notified NCIS that they thought the defendant had acted illegally in setting off against his VAT liability the VAT on works carried out on his own property. Because of the delay which … Continue reading Bowman v Fels (Bar Council and Others intervening): CA 8 Mar 2005
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
The claimant had served an asset freezing order on the bank in respect of one of its customers. The bank paid out on a cheque inadvertently as to the order. The Commissioners claimed against the bank in negligence. The bank denied any duty of care. Held: The bank’s appeal succeeded. The bank owed a duty … Continue reading HM Customs and Excise v Barclays Bank Plc: HL 21 Jun 2006
PI Damages not Reduced for Own Pension The plaintiff policeman was disabled by the negligence of the defendant and received a disablement pension. Part had been contributed by himself and part by his employer. Held: The plaintiff’s appeal succeeded. Damages for personal injury were not to be reduced by deducting the full net value of … Continue reading Parry v Cleaver: HL 5 Feb 1969
The applicants had had their requests for asylum refused. They complained that if they were removed from the UK, their article 3 rights would be infringed. If they were returned to Pakistan or Vietnam they would be persecuted for their religious faiths. Held: A distinction was to be made between domestic cases involving actions within … Continue reading Regina v Special Adjudicator ex parte Ullah; Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 17 Jun 2004
The claimants objected to orders made freezing their assets under the 2006 Order, after being included in the Consolidated List of suspected members of terrorist organisations. Held: The orders could not stand. Such orders were made by the executive without parliamentary scrutiny by the use of Orders in Council. Statutory provision for counter-terrorism was in … Continue reading HM Treasury v Ahmed and Others: SC 27 Jan 2010
Several defendants appealed against confiscation orders made against them on convictions for avoiding customs and excise duty by re-importing cigarettes originally intended for export. They had accepted the orders being made by consent, but now appealed saying that the consent had been given following inaccurate legal advice. Held: The appeals were allowed. The fact that … Continue reading Mackle, Regina v: SC 29 Jan 2014
Forfeiture rule disapplied after spousal abuse The claimant sought the disapplication of the forfeiture rule. She had been convicted of the manslaughter of her seriously abusive husband. The court considered whether a conviction for murder set aside and replaced with one of manslaughter was a conviction under the 1982 Act, and that the three month … Continue reading Challen v Challen and Another: ChD 27 May 2020
Cere Needed Releasing Future Claims A compromise agreement which appeared to claim to settle all outstanding claims between the employee and employer, did not prevent the employee later claiming for stigma losses where, at the time of the agreement, the circumstances which might lead to a claim were unknown to either party, and such losses … Continue reading Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA v Ali, Khan and others (No 1); BCCI v Ali: HL 1 Mar 2001
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 claimant sought judicial review of the lawfulness of search warrants given to the Commissioners and executed at their various offices. The Revenue had suspect the dishonest implementation of a tax avoidance scheme. The claimants said that there were no sufficient ground for the request for and issue of the warrants. The investigation had been … Continue reading Mercury Tax Group Ltd and Another, Regina (On the Application of) v HM Revenue and Customs and Others: Admn 13 Nov 2008
The appellant said that the police officers had acted unlawfully when collecting the evidence used against him, in that the information used to support the request for permission to undertake clandestine surveillance had been insufficiently detailed, and that the police had acted in breach of his article 8 rights in obtaining evidence by surveillance since … Continue reading Kinloch v Her Majesty’s Advocate: SC 19 Dec 2012
The defendant had been convicted of offences under the 1979 Act, but then conditionally discharged. He had appealed against a confiscation order. The prosecutor now appealed against an order quashing the confiscation. Held: The appeal was allowed. The answer lay in the important distinction between situations where the court was exercising a discretion, and where … Continue reading Varma, Regina v: SC 10 Oct 2012
The defendant knew that he had gonorrhea. He had intercourse with his wife, and infected her. She would not have consented had she known. He appealed his convictions for assault and causing grievous bodily harm. Held: ‘The question in this case is whether a man who knows that he has gonorrhea, and who by having … Continue reading Regina v Clarence: CCCR 20 Nov 1888
Rejection of Submission of No Case to Answer The defendant had faced a charge of affray. The court having rejected his submission of having no case to answer, he had made an exculpatory statement from the dock. He appealed against his conviction. Held: Lord Lane LCJ said: ‘How then should the judge approach a submission … Continue reading Regina v Galbraith: CCA 1981
The applicant suffered mutiple sclerosis and considered that she might wish to go abroad to end her life. She asked the court to make more clear the guidance provided by the Director as to whether her partner might be prosecuted under section 2(1) if he accompanied her to Switzerland. She said that the failure to … Continue reading Purdy, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another: QBD 29 Oct 2008
The appellant’s daughter had been stopped entering the country with andpound;150,000 in cash. The police sought an order for its forfeiture, suspecting a link with terrorism. The magistrates found no evidence of such, and declined to make the order, but equally refused to award the defendant her costs. She now appealed against the refusal to … Continue reading Perinpanathan, Regina (on The Application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates Court and Another: CA 4 Feb 2010
The court was asked whether the Financial Services Authority had a power to prosecute money laundering offences under the 2002 Act, or whether, as contended by the defendant, its powers were limited to sections under the 2000 Act. Held: The defendant’s appeal failed. The FSA had the powers it contended for, and the provisions of … Continue reading Rollins, Regina v: SC 28 Jul 2010
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 court was asked whether the Financial Services Authority had itself the power to prosecute offences under the 2002 Act. The defence said that the FSA’s powers were limited to offences under the 2000 Act. The FSA relied on its common law power to bring a prosecution. Held: the FSA was not a statutory body, … Continue reading Rollins, Regina v: CACD 9 Oct 2009
The defendant had been accused of attempting to import controlled drugs, but the substances actually found were not in fact a controlled drug, though he had believed and intended them to be. He appealed saying that he should not be conviced of an . .
The defendant had pleaded to charges of possession of drugs with intent to supply. He was sentenced, but then the prosecutor was 14 months’ late serving its notice with regard to the confiscation order under section 16. The crown now appealed . .
The appellants complained that the recovery order made against them in part under the transitional provisions were unlawful. They had claimed benefits as single people but were married to each other and for a house not occupied. The difficulty was . .
