On 21st February, an article from Bartfields says that The revisiting of old confiscation orders by prosecutors under section 22 of the UK’s Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 is becoming more frequent but as yet few variations made under section 22 have been appealed.  In stark contrast to the position when a confiscation order is first made, on a section 22 revision the court – in other words the judge – has discretion concerning what variation to make to the original confiscation order and even whether to refuse to make any variation at all.  The article considers the case of Mundy, where a man was convicted of drugs offences in 2008, and £163,090 was left unpaid from a confiscation order that had been obtained.  Many years later, prosecutors became aware that Mundy now had assets that could be, and were, restrained and might be used to settle the outstanding amount.  A section 22 application was made for £29,291.  Mundy claimed he could or should only pay £2,561.  The judge refused to make the order and the Crown appealed this decision.  The Court of Appeal said that the Crown Court judge had a discretion to refuse to vary (or refuse) the order and that on the facts it was properly open to him to do so in Mr Mundy’s case.  The court dismissed the prosecution’s appeal.

Author: raytodd2017

Chartered Legal Executive and former senior manager with Isle of Man Customs and Excise, where I was (amongst other things) Sanctions Officer (for UN/EU sanctions), Export Licensing Officer and Manager of the Legal-Library & Collectorate Support Section

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: