Heard in the Court of Appeal before Lord Justice Beldam, Mr Justice Dyson and Mr Justice Richards
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/eb027267 |
| Published date | 01 March 2000 |
| Pages | 89-93 |
| Date | 01 March 2000 |
| Author | Jonathan McNae |
| Subject Matter | Accounting & finance |
Journal of Money Laundering Control — Vol. 4 No. 1
CASE NOTE
R ν Gibson
Heard in the Court of Appeal before Lord Justice
Beldam,
Mr Justice Dyson and Mr Justice Richards
Jonathan McNae
The appellant, Leonard Gibson, was found guilty of
the acquisition, possession or use of proceeds of
criminal conduct contrary to s. 93B of the Criminal
Justice Act 1988 (inserted by s. 30 of the Criminal
Justice Act 1993), and sentenced to nine months'
imprisonment suspended for two years. The relevant
provisions of s. 93B of the Act are:
'(2) It is a defence to a charge of committing an
offence under this section that the person charged
acquired or used the property or had possession
of it for adequate consideration.
(3) For the purposes of subsection (2) above —
(a) a person acquires property for inadequate
consideration if the value of the consideration is
significantly less than the value of the property;
and
(b) a person uses or has possession of property for
inadequate consideration if the value of the con-
sideration is significantly less than the value of his
use or possession of the property.
(4) The provision for any person of services or
goods which are of assistance to him in criminal
conduct shall not be treated as consideration for
the purposes of subsection (2) above . . .
(6) For the purposes of this section, having posses-
sion of any property shall be taken to be doing an
act in relation to it.'
THE FACTS
John Bargetto was a bachelor and wealthy business-
man who died in 1995, leaving an estate valued at
just under £3m. By a will made some weeks
before his death, he left substantial bequests to his
secretary and nephew and much of the remainder
of his estate to charity. Probate of the will was
granted to his solicitors and executors early in 1996.
The executors believed that they had got in all the
assets of the estate but, unknown to them, Mr
Bargetto had paid money into three undisclosed
bank accounts containing a total of over £75,000.
Shortly after Mr Bargetto's death, one of his oldest
and closest friends and a former business associate,
Ferdinando Aguda, went to Mr Bargetto's home
and took possession of documents relating to the
three accounts of which the executors were unaware
and of other papers to enable him to transfer money
from the accounts into an account in Jersey which
they designated a 'Bargetto' account. Into this
account approximately £75,000 was accumulated
and then transferred to other bank accounts. The pro-
secution alleged that the object of these transactions
was to disguise the source of the money. Mr Aguda
and his family knew that the money had been paid
into the accounts concerned for the purpose of
evading tax and had decided to conceal the existence
of the accounts from the executors.
To disguise the true source of the money, sub-
stantial sums were paid from the Bargetto Jersey
account into accounts operated by the family and
their friends. One of these accounts was an account
of LG Developers, managed and operated by the
appellant in connection with his business as a
property developer, which included the management
of a property in Muswell Hill, London. In February
1996 over £41,000 was transferred into the Jersey
account and on the following day, a cheque for
£28,000 was received by the appellant for the
credit of his LG Developers account.
Following an enquiry, the three unknown
accounts were uncovered and the transfers into and
out of
Jersey
were disclosed. Mr Aguda and members
Journal of Money Laundering Control
Vol. 4, No. 1, 2000, pp 89-93
© Henry Stewart Publications
ISSN 1368-5201
Page 89
To continue reading
Request your trial