Regina v Johal: CACD 19 Apr 2013

The defendant appealed against a confiscation order made on his conviction for possession of a Class B controlled drug. There had been considerable delays in the completion of the process, and it had exceeded the two year limit. The appellant argued that exceptional circumstances had not existed. The court had, of its own motion, adjourned anticipated confiscation proceedings on the day before the two-year period expired, but had neither considered exceptional circumstances nor set any kind of period, whether by way of fixed date or otherwise.
Held: The court made the assumption in favour of the defendant that section 14(11) did not apply where the order of adjournment was not a proper postponement because of failure to specify any period, but nevertheless held that the Crown Court Recorder had been entitled subsequently to decide that there were exceptional circumstances, and that in consequence the confiscation order was valid.
Elias LJ, Irwin, Saunders JJ
[2013] EWCA Crim 647, [2014] 1 WLR 146, [2013] WLR(D) 175
Bailii, WLRD
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 14(8) 16 18
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedAssociated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation CA 10-Nov-1947
Administrative Discretion to be Used Reasonably
The applicant challenged the manner of decision making as to the conditions which had been attached to its licence to open the cinema on Sundays. It had not been allowed to admit children under 15 years of age. The statute provided no appeal . .
CitedLondon and Clydeside Estates v Aberdeen District Council HL 8-Nov-1979
The appellants had sought a Certificate of Alternative Development. The certificate provided was defective in that it did not notify the appellants, as required, of their right to appeal. Their appeal out of time was refused.
Held: The House . .
CitedAttorney General’s Reference No 3 of 1999 (Lynn) CACD 26-Mar-1999
There was an obligation to destroy fingerprints and samples in respect of persons who were acquitted. Nevertheless, if such material was unlawfully retained, it could be used for the purpose of investigating another offence, and the evidence could . .

Cited by:
CitedGuraj, 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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 March 2021; Ref: scu.509986