header-logo header-logo

Confiscation Order

10 July 2008
Issue: 7329 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

R v Morgan [2008] EWCA Crim 1323, [2008] All ER (D) 274 (Jun)

The court retains the jurisdiction to stay an application for confiscation where it amounts to an abuse of the court’s process. That power exists where it would be oppressive to seek confiscation. It is not sufficient to establish oppression (and thus abuse of process) that the effect of a confiscation order will be to extract from a defendant a sum greater than his profit from his crime(s).

Where: (i) the defendant’s crimes are limited to offences causing loss to one or more identifiable loser(s); (ii) his benefit is limited to those crimes, (iii) the loser has neither brought nor intends any civil proceedings to recover the loss; but (iv) the defendant either has repaid the loser, or stands ready willing and able immediately to repay him, the full amount of the loss, it may amount to an abuse of process for the Crown to seek a confiscation order which would result in an oppressive order to pay up to double the full restitution which the defendant has made or is willing immediately to make.

There are some situations where it would not be oppressive to seek a confiscation order: (i) where the defendant, even if he has repaid the victim or is ready to do so, has significantly profited through use of the stolen money while it was in his hands and thus has obtained a benefit beyond the loss inflicted on the victim; (ii) where, although repayment in full is offered, it is uncertain that it will be accomplished; indeed it may be difficult to establish abuse in such a case unless the defendant has either already made restitution in full or is in a position to tender it immediately in a guaranteed form, such as a banker’s draft or funds in a solicitor’s hands.

Issue: 7329 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Birketts—trainee cohort

Birketts—trainee cohort

Firm welcomes new cohort of 29 trainee solicitors for 2025

Keoghs—four appointments

Keoghs—four appointments

Four partner hires expand legal expertise in Scotland and Northern Ireland

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Real estate team in Yorkshire welcomes new partner

NEWS
Robert Taylor of 360 Law Services warns in this week's NLJ that adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) risks entrenching disadvantage for SME law firms, unless tools are tailored to their needs
The Court of Protection has ruled in Macpherson v Sunderland City Council that capacity must be presumed unless clearly rebutted. In this week's NLJ, Sam Karim KC and Sophie Hurst of Kings Chambers dissect the judgment and set out practical guidance for advisers faced with issues relating to retrospective capacity and/or assessments without an examination
Delays and dysfunction continue to mount in the county court, as revealed in a scathing Justice Committee report and under discussion this week by NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School. Bulk claims—especially from private parking firms—are overwhelming the system, with 8,000 cases filed weekly
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve charts the turbulent progress of the Employment Rights Bill through the House of Lords, in this week's NLJ
From oligarchs to cosmetic clinics, strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) target journalists, activists and ordinary citizens with intimidating legal tactics. Writing in NLJ this week, Sadie Whittam of Lancaster University explores the weaponisation of litigation to silence critics
back-to-top-scroll