The defendant had been convicted of a mortgage style fraud in 2013, and confiscation orders made. He now sought to appeal out of time.
Held: ‘ it would be contrary to the good administration of justice to grant so lengthy an extension of time as now sought – an extension for which no real reason has been given, aside from the very late instruction of fresh counsel long after the single judge’s refusal of leave. This is not a case where there has been any intervening change in the law. This is not a case where there has been a subsequent development in the facts. This is a case where, on a considered basis, the amount of benefit had been expressly agreed by counsel below. That may not of itself necessarily be conclusive. But, in our view, it is a very important factor. This court will not speedily or readily depart from agreements as to benefit and realisable assets made in confiscation proceedings by properly instructed and experienced counsel on an advised basis.’ Indeed the court might have made an increased sum to account for rents received.
Citations:
[2018] EWCA Crim 244, [2018] 4 WLR 83, [2018] 2 Cr App R (S) 23
Links:
Statutes:
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 79 80
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Criminal Sentencing
Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.624002