header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
07 May 2009 / James Kirby
Issue: 7368 / Categories: Opinion , Public , Legal services
printer mail-detail

Flaws in the system

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Is the weight of legislation affecting the administration of justice? James Kirby reports

In R v Chambers [2008] EWCA Crim 2467, [2008] All ER (D) 170 (Oct) Mr Chambers had pleaded guilty to an offence under s 170(1)(b) of the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979.

Put briefly, 600kg of tobacco had been smuggled in to the UK from Belgium. Mr Chambers and a co-defendant were later found on commercial premises in Kent with keys to lockups containing that tobacco: £66,120 of duty had not been paid. It was never the Crown’s case that Mr Chambers had been involved in the importation, but was rather concerned in warehousing the tobacco for onward sale.

But under the Excise Goods (Holding, Movement, Warehousing and REDS) Regulations 1992 (SI 1992/3135) the smuggler or his “consignee” are liable for the evasion of the duty payable on imported goods such as tobacco. The trial judge concluded that Mr Chambers had obtained a pecuniary advantage equal to the value of the unpaid duty. A confiscation order was made

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll