header-logo header-logo

28 June 2022
Issue: 7985 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Profession
printer mail-detail

Recovering ill-gotten gains

More money could be returned to victims of crime, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Max Hill QC has told Peers

Giving evidence to the House of Lords Fraud Act 2006 and Digital Fraud Select Committee last week, Hill recommended the government consider court powers to reimburse victims with any additional funds that are recovered. 

Currently, a Confiscation Order identifies the amount a criminal financially benefited from their crime and orders repayment. If the criminal is later found to have additional money and assets, the Confiscation Order can be increased.

However, there is no equivalent power to increase Compensation Orders, which give money back to victims. Therefore, additional funds recovered cannot be given to the victims of the crime.

Hill said: ‘It is right that as much money as possible should be returned to victims of crime but I am concerned current legislation means in some cases we do not have the power to do this.’

Issue: 7985 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll