The court had adjourned its proceedings in the absence of the defendant, so as not to fall foul of the requirement that a confiscation inquiry must take place within six months of conviction. The defendant appealed.
Held: The court could exercise its common law power to adjourn. The statutory power could only be exercised where the defendant appeared at court. The common law exercise of the power was valid, and in accord with Sekhon.
Scott Baker LJ, Pitchford J, Sir Edwin Jowitt
Times 11-Mar-2003, Gazette 24-Apr-2003
England and Wales
Cited – Sekhon, etc v Regina CACD 16-Dec-2002
The defendants appealed against confiscation orders on the basis that in various ways, the Crown had failed to comply with procedural requirements.
Held: The courts must remember the importance of such procedures in the fight against crime, . .
Cited – Regina v Soneji; Regina v Bullen CACD 20-Jun-2003
If the court could only postpone confiscation proceedings in exceptional circumstances, it behoved the court before allowing such an adjournment to enquire into the justification, and to record the circumstances which made it exceptional. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.180116