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 that some offence predated the commencement of the 2003 Act. They argued that the wording of the commencement order meant that if any offence predated the commencement, a confiscation was unavailable for any.
Held: (Lords Reed and Mance dissenting) The appeal failed. The interpretation proposed would lead to tactical charging. It could not have been intended that a number of post-2003 offences should be removed from the scope of the 2002 Act simply because the defendant was convicted of an associated offence before the commencement date. The statute should be read to avoid an absurd result, for current offences being dealt with under a system no longer in force. No unfairness would arise by the result proposed by the Crown.
Lord Reed dissented saying that the language of the provisions could not be interpreted as excluding offences which the prosecution had elected to leave out of account for the purpose of assessing the benefit obtained by the defendant.
Lord Mance (Deputy President), Lord Kerr, Lord Reed, Lord Hughes, Lady Black
[2018] UKSC 23, [2018] 1 WLR 2431, [2018] 3 All ER 849, [2018] Crim LR 766, [2018] 1 WLR 2431, [2018] Lloyd’s Rep FC 407, UKSC 2016/0132
Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Video Summary, SC 23 Nov 2017 am Video, SC 23 Nov 2017 pm Video
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Commencement No 5, Transitional Provisions, Savings and Amendments) Order 2003
Northern Ireland
Citing:
Appeal from – McCool and Another, Regina v CANI 22-May-2015
Renewed applications for leave to appeal by two applicants who were convicted, following pleas of guilty, of offences of false accounting. They challenged the use of the Commencement order for the 2002 Act as it applied to offences coming into force . .
Cited – Regina v Central Valuation Officer and another ex parte Edison First Power Limited HL 10-Apr-2003
Powergen sold a property to Edison. Powergen paid rates under a separate statutory rating regime, and paid an additional thirteen million pounds under an apportionment. Edison later complained that in being rated itself, the authorities had . .
Mentioned – Gumbs v Attorney General Of Anguilla PC 7-Jul-2009
Anguilla – whether there is a public right of way, and, if there is, the extent of that way, over a parcel of land at Little Bay, Anguilla. . .
Cited – Regina v Ahmed CACD 8-Feb-2000
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 . .
Cited – Inco Europe Ltd and Others v First Choice Distributors (A Firm) and Others HL 10-Mar-2000
Although the plain words of the Act would not allow an appeal to the Court of Appeal under the circumstances presently applying, it was clear that the parliamentary draftsman had failed to achieve what he had wanted to, that the omission was in . .
Cited – Simpson v Regina CACD 23-May-2003
The appellant challenged a confiscation order made on his conviction of VAT fraud. It was argued that one could not be made unless a proper notice had been given, and none of the offences occurred before 1995. On the assumption that section 1 of the . .
Cited – Martin v Regina CACD 30-Oct-2001
It would not be appropriate except in exceptional circumstances ‘which would make the evidence especially probative’ to take into account, when deciding whether excessive force was used in self-defence, that the defendant was suffering from a . .
Cited – Regina v Brown and others CACD 7-Dec-2001
The appellants were accused of involvement in a large conspiracy to defraud the Customs of import duties on alcohol. The main conspirator had committed the offences whilst in prison for similar offences. The parties appealed sentence and the . .
Cited – Martin v Regina CACD 30-Oct-2001
The defendant had shot a burglar who had entered his isolated home at night. He claimed self defence, but the burglar appeared to have been shot as he retreated. A defendant is entitled to use reasonable force to protect himself, others for whom he . .
Cited – Aslam, Regina v CACD 22-Oct-2004
The appellant had pleaded guilty to a number of offences of dishonesty and asked for a number of others to be taken into consideration. One of the offences to which he had pleaded guilty and one of those which he had asked to be taken into . .
Cited – Clarke, Regina v; Regina v McDaid HL 6-Feb-2008
An indictment had not been signed despite a clear statutory provision that it should be. The defects were claimed to have been cured by amendment before sentence.
Held: The convictions failed. Sections 1(1) and 2(1) of the 1933 Act which . .
Cited – Stapleton, Regina v CACD 15-May-2008
The appellant pleaded guilty to six offences of furnishing false information, contrary to the Theft Act 1968. She was committed to the Crown Court for sentence under the 2002 Act, with a view to a confiscation order being considered. She had made . .
Cited – Regina v Soneji and Bullen HL 21-Jul-2005
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 . .
Cited – Regina v Knights and Another HL 21-Jul-2005
The defendants had been convicted of offences involving dealing with goods on which customs duty had not been paid. After conviction a timetable was set for sentencing and for confiscation proceedings. The House considered the making of the . .
Cited – Waya, Regina v SC 14-Nov-2012
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 . .
Cited – Lazarus, Regina v CACD 24-Aug-2004
. .
Cited – Bukhari, Regina v CACD 13-Apr-2018
Appeal from sentences for offences of false imprisonment, threat to kill, and common assault, as to 32 months for the offence of false imprisonment with concurrent sentences of 18 months and 4 months respectively for the offences of threats to kill . .
Cited – Guraj, Regina v SC 14-Dec-2016
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 . .
Cited – Bukhari, Regina v CACD 18-Nov-2008
Appeal from confiscation order – order made under Act not applicable at the time of commission of the offences.
Held: The variation of what was originally an unlawful order was itself unlawful. New confiscation order made under the applicable . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2021; Ref: scu.615571
