Proceeds of Crime in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • R v Rezvi
    • House of Lords
    • 24 Enero 2002

    It is a notorious fact that professional and habitual criminals frequently take steps to conceal their profits from crime. Effective but fair powers of confiscating the proceeds of crime are therefore essential. The provisions of the 1988 Act are aimed at depriving such offenders of the proceeds of their criminal conduct. Its purposes are to punish convicted offenders, to deter the commission of further offences and to reduce the profits available to fund further criminal enterprises.

  • R v Waya (Terry)
    • Supreme Court
    • 14 Noviembre 2012

    The purpose of the legislation is plainly, and has repeatedly been held to be, to impose upon convicted defendants a severe regime for removing from them their proceeds of crime. It does not, however, follow that its deterrent qualities represent the essence (or the "grain") of the legislation. They are, no doubt, an incident of it, but they are not its essence. Its essence, and its frequently declared purpose, is to remove from criminals the pecuniary proceeds of their crime.

    Similarly, it can be accepted that the scheme of the Act, and of previous confiscation legislation, is to focus on the value of the defendant's obtained proceeds of crime, whether retained or not. It is an important part of the scheme that even if the proceeds have been spent, a confiscation order up to the value of the proceeds will follow against legitimately acquired assets to the extent that they are available for realisation.

    The case of a defendant such as was considered in Morgan and Bygrave is, however, a different one. To make a confiscation order in his case, when he has restored to the loser any proceeds of crime which he had ever had, is disproportionate. It would not achieve the statutory objective of removing his proceeds of crime but would simply be an additional financial penalty.

  • R v Raymond George May
    • House of Lords
    • 14 Mayo 2008

    The first question is: has the defendant (D) benefited from the relevant criminal conduct? If the answer to that question is negative, the inquiry ends. If the answer is positive, the second question is: what is the value of the benefit D has so obtained?

    (6) D ordinarily obtains property if in law he owns it, whether alone or jointly, which will ordinarily connote a power of disposition or control, as where a person directs a payment or conveyance of property to someone else. Mere couriers or custodians or other very minor contributors to an offence, rewarded by a specific fee and having no interest in the property or the proceeds of sale, are unlikely to be found to have obtained that property.

  • R v Steven William Montila and Others
    • House of Lords
    • 25 Noviembre 2004

    A person may have reasonable grounds to suspect that property is one thing (A) when in fact it is something different (B). But that is not so when the question is what a person knows. A person cannot know that something is A when in fact it is B. The proposition that a person knows that something is A is based on the premise that it is true that it is A. The fact that the property is A provides the starting point. Then there is the question whether the person knows that the property is A.

See all results
Legislation
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
  • Taxing the Proceeds of Crime
    • Nbr. 8-2, April 2000
    • Journal of Financial Crime
    • 136-144
    Organised crime groups, in particular drug traffickers, generate considerable amounts of money from their criminal activities. Over the last two decades jurisdictions around the world have therefor...
  • Taxing the Proceeds of Crime
    • Nbr. 1-2, February 1997
    • Journal of Money Laundering Control
    • 117-124
    Illegally acquired gains are taxable, according to the judge‐made law of common law countries. Revenue codes are surprisingly silent on the subject. For a short while, though, things were different...
  • Knowledge Management in the Proceeds of Crime Community
    • Nbr. 8-3, January 2001
    • Journal of Financial Crime
    • 207-217
    The title of this paper immediately raises a number of issues. Is there such an entity as ‘the proceeds of crime community’? If such an entity exists, can it be ‘managed’? What role does knowledge ...
  • Book Review: Confiscation and the Proceeds of Crime
    • Nbr. 67-3, June 2003
    • Journal of Criminal Law, The
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
See all results
Forms
  • Chapter MLR3C11100
    • HMRC Guidance manuals
    • Formularios de Derecho Civil, Mercantil y Registral
    • HM Revenue & Customs
    ...... Politically Exposed Person. . . POCA. Proceeds of Crime Act. . . PSP. Payment Service Providers. ......
  • Chapter MLR3C2050
    • HMRC Guidance manuals
    • Formularios de Derecho Civil, Mercantil y Registral
    • HM Revenue & Customs
    ...... The Terrorism Act 2000. Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001. The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. The Counter ......
  • Chapter MLR3C2400
    • HMRC Guidance manuals
    • Formularios de Derecho Civil, Mercantil y Registral
    • HM Revenue & Customs
    .... . . Under Part 7 of the Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA) businesses and their employees are required to ......
  • Chapter DMBM900150
    • HMRC Guidance manuals
    • Formularios de Derecho Civil, Mercantil y Registral
    ...... restraining orders and confiscation orders granted under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. Where there is any mention of NCA (National Crime ......
See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT