Singh v Director of the Assets Recovery Agency: CA 17 May 2005

The defendant had successfully appealed a confiscation order which had been made without jurisdiction, but now claimed that that exempted those assets from later civil proceedings to recover the criminal proceeds.
Held: The failure of the previous criminal confiscation proceedings did not prevent the later making of civil recovery orders. The exceptions allowed under section 308 could not have applied. To allow them to apply would be to allow just the sort of technical mischief which the 2002 Act was designed to prevent.
Brooke, Latham, Lloyd LJJ
[2005] EWCA Civ 580, Times 31-May-2005
Bailii
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 308
England and Wales
Citing:
See AlsoSekhon, 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, . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 January 2021; Ref: scu.224924