Confiscation can carry on biting
Mr Padda (Padda 2013 EWCA 2330) discovered to his horror how his attempt to turn around his life by setting up a legitimate business led him back into the Crown Court for a re-consideration of his available amount. This case should provide a salutary warning about the ability of the prosecution to seek to satisfy the disparity between benefit and available amount at the time of confiscation. The Appellant had been convicted of drug dealing in 2006 at shrewsbury Crown Court. The benefit from his offending was assessed at £156,226.74. However, the available amount was only £9,520 and hence a confiscation order was made in that amount. Following his release from prison, he set up his own business but the CPs became aware that he had acquired new assets as a result. It applied under section 22 for a reconsideration of the available amount and a Restraint Order. The application was granted in the total sum of £74,652.02 with a further 12 month default sentence. Mr Pudda appealed to the Court of Appeal but it upheld the decision. Mr Justice Irwin said "clearly the passage of time was important and the longer the time elapsed, the more a judge, on the particular facts of a given case, may be likely to give emphasis to it. However, the proper exercise of such a discretion must always turn on the particular facts".
Articles are intended as an introduction to the topic and do not constitute legal advice.