Regina v Levin: CACD 29 Jan 2004

The defendant appealed against a confiscation order, challenging the standard of proof applied by the judge.
Held: The judge was entitled to include in his consideration, the evidence given at the trial as well as that on the confiscation application. He was to apply the civil standard of proof. That power was in 71(7A), which was a clear change by Parliament. The civil standard now applies, the court may make far-reaching assumptions; could require information from a defendant and draw inferences from any failure to reply, and rely on evidence from the trial and information properly obtained bfore the trial.


Rose LJ, Poole, Davis JJ


Times 20-Feb-2004


Criminal Justice Act 1988 71(7A) Part IV


England and Wales


CitedRegina v Dickens CACD 11-Apr-1990
The defendant had been convicted of conspiring to import cannabis, and made subject inter alia to a confiscation order.
Held: ‘ the object of the Act is to ensure, so far as is possible, that the convicted drug trafficker is parted from the . .
CitedRegina v Rose CACD 17-Feb-1993
A judge must follow the Regina v Dickens guidelines when making a drugs confiscation order. Alliott J said: ‘We agree that if admissible evidence satisfies a judge so that he is sure that any given sum is a benefit, then there is no need for him to . .
CitedRegina v Chrastny (No 2) CACD 14-Mar-1991
The defendant was the only one of several defendants convicted of involvement in a drugs case. He appealed a confiscation order under which he carried the entire weight of the confiscation order.
Held: The order was correct provided that the . .
CitedPhillips 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 . .
CitedMcintosh v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 14-Feb-2003
Confiscation proceedings are part of the sentencing process, and do not constitute a separate criminal charge. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.193765