Following his conviction for false accounting, a confiscation order was made against the defendant. After agreeing various adjournments the prosecutor said that the magistrates court had no power to allow such an adjournment under section 75(2) of the 1980 Act, because section 75(2)(a) of the 1988 Act did not allow magistrates to remit any part of a confiscation order, and that adjournment with the effect of restarting any calculation of interest would amount to a remission.
Held: The case stated was denied, and the defendant’s appeal failed. The prosecutor’s argument was powerful. However sections 76 and 77 of the Act ‘may readily be deployed in the magistrates’ court for the purpose of enforcing a Crown Court confiscation order without in the least trammelling over the terms of that order itself, and it seems to me plain that that was the legislative intention. ‘
Citations:
[2007] EWHC 1193 (Admin), [2008] 1 WLR 438
Links:
Statutes:
Magistrates Courts Act 1980 75(2) 76 77, Criminal Justice Act 1988 75(5)(a)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Hastings and Rother Justices ex parte David Graham Anscombe Admn 5-Feb-1998
. .
Cited – Revenue and Customs Prosecution Service v Kearney Admn 27-Feb-2007
The Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office appealed by way of case stated from a decision of the Crown Court to extend by four months the time limit available to pay a confiscation order made under section 71 of the 1988 Act. The question was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Magistrates
Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.253289