header-logo header-logo

Proceeds of crime: Confiscating ill-gotten gains

09 November 2022
Issue: 8002 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Fraud
printer mail-detail
Major reforms to the system for recovering the proceeds of crime have been set out by the Law Commission.

The proposals, announced this week in a report, 'Confiscation of the Proceeds of Crime After Conviction', are the culmination of a Home Office-commissioned review. They aim to make confiscation orders more effective, recover a potential £8m more ill-gotten gains from offenders, and speed up the recovery system.

Law Commissioner Professor Penney Lewis said: ‘The current system for recovering the proceeds of crime is ineffective and letting down victims and the public.

‘By boosting enforcement powers, imposing more realistic and fairer orders, and speeding up proceedings, we can ensure greater public confidence in the system, and send a strong message that crime doesn’t pay.’

Under the reforms, strict timetables for hearings would be set so that confiscation proceedings take place immediately after the defendant is sentenced. Courts would be given powers to impose ‘contingent enforcement orders’ at the same time as making a confiscation order so the defendant’s assets, including their property and bank account, could be seized if proceeds are not paid back in time.

To prevent defendants hiding their assets, courts’ powers to impose ‘restraint orders’ would be strengthened by placing the ‘risk of dissipation’ test on a statutory footing. The factors for assessing a defendant as having a criminal lifestyle would be updated to take account of gains from their wider criminal conduct, and more attention would be paid to the defendant’s ability to pay.

The Commission also proposes that judges be able to adjust the funds that must be paid back, to avoid situations where there is no realistic prospect of recovering the full amount. Finally, the new confiscation regime would have a clear statutory objective to deprive defendants of their benefit from criminal conduct, rather than the objective of punishment.

Issue: 8002 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Fraud
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Arc Pensions Law—Ian D’Costa

Arc Pensions Law—Ian D’Costa

Pensions firm welcomes legal director in London

Shakespeare Martineau—Jonathan Warren

Shakespeare Martineau—Jonathan Warren

Real estate disputes team strengthened by London partner hire

Morgan Lewis—Christian Tuddenham

Morgan Lewis—Christian Tuddenham

Litigation partner joins disputes team in London

NEWS
Government plans for offender ‘restriction zones’ risk creating ‘digital cages’ that blur punishment with surveillance, warns Henrietta Ronson, partner at Corker Binning, in this week's issue of NLJ
Louise Uphill, senior associate at Moore Barlow LLP, dissects the faltering rollout of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 in this week's NLJ
Judgments are ‘worthless without enforcement’, says HHJ Karen Walden-Smith, senior circuit judge and chair of the Civil Justice Council’s enforcement working group. In this week's NLJ, she breaks down the CJC’s April 2025 report, which identified systemic flaws and proposed 39 reforms, from modernising procedures to protecting vulnerable debtors
Writing in NLJ this week, Katherine Harding and Charlotte Finley of Penningtons Manches Cooper examine Standish v Standish [2025] UKSC 26, the Supreme Court ruling that narrowed what counts as matrimonial property, and its potential impact upon claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975
In this week's NLJ, Dr Jon Robins, editor of The Justice Gap and lecturer at Brighton University, reports on a campaign to posthumously exonerate Christine Keeler. 60 years after her perjury conviction, Keeler’s son Seymour Platt has petitioned the king to exercise the royal prerogative of mercy, arguing she was a victim of violence and moral hypocrisy, not deceit. Supported by Felicity Gerry KC, the dossier brands the conviction 'the ultimate in slut-shaming'
back-to-top-scroll