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 in section 4(2), but could rely on evidence given during the trial. Although art 6.2 was not engaged, article 6.1 was, and where the prosecution relied on criminal offending to prove the existence of benefit, they had to prove that offending. The defendant was presumed innocent until proved guilty though to the civil standard of proof.
Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood, Lord Mance and Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury
[2009] UKHL 19, [2009] HRLR 21, [2009] 2 WLR 1101, [2009] Lloyd’s Rep FC 442, [2009] 1 AC 1026, [2009] 4 All ER 594
Bailii, Times
Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 170(2), Drug Trafficking Act 1994
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Phillips v United Kingdom ECHR 5-Jul-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 . .
Cited – Van Offeren v The Netherlands ECHR 5-Jul-2005
Confiscation proceedings fell to be treated as part of the process of sentencing after conviction and did not, of themselves, involve charging the offender with offences other than those of which he had been convicted and which had given rise to the . .
Cited – Ali and Another v Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office CACD 9-Jul-2008
Appeal from convictions of money laundering . .
Cited – Geerings v The Netherlands ECHR 1-Mar-2007
Where a defendant is acquitted of offences of which he was charged, it was not legitimate then to infer that he had benefitted from those offences for confiscation proceedings. . .
Appeal From – Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office v Briggs-Price and Another CA 14-Jun-2007
. .
Cited by:
Cited – Clarke v Regina CACD 12-Jun-2009
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: . .
Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice, Human Rights
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.341606
