Queen v Shakir Ullah
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judge | Morgan LCJ |
| Judgment Date | 27 May 2021 |
| Neutral Citation | [2021] NICA 33 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Northern Ireland) |
| Date | 27 May 2021 |
1
Neutral Citation No: [2021] NICA 33
Judgment: approved by the Court for handing down
(subject to editorial corrections)*
Ref: MOR11531
ICOS No:
Delivered: 27/05/2021
IN HER MAJESTY’S COURT OF APPEAL IN NORTHERN IRELAND
___________
THE QUEEN
v
SHAKIR ULLAH
___________
Ms Auret (instructed by PPS) for the Prosecution
Mr Greene QC with Mr Heraghty (instructed by Trevor Smyth & Co Solicitors) for the
Defendant
_________
Before: Morgan LCJ, Maguire LJ and Scoffield J
_________
MORGAN LCJ (delivering the judgment of the court)
[1] This is a renewal to the full court of an application for leave to appeal, refused
by Keegan J, against an order by His Honour Judge Lynch QC made on 17 December
2019 when, upon an application pursuant to section 172 of the Proceeds of Crime Act
2002 (“POCA”), he increased a confiscation order made against the appellant by
£39,666.66.
The Statutory Regime
[2] Section 156 of POCA provides for the making of a confiscation order upon
conviction. Section 156(4)(c) states that the court must decide whether the offender
has benefited from his particular criminal conduct. If so, it must decide the
recoverable amount and make an order requiring him to pay that amount. The
recoverable amount is an amount equal to the defendant’s benefit from the conduct
concerned but section 157(2) provides that if the defendant shows that the “available
amount” is less than that benefit the recoverable amount is the available amount.
On that issue the burden of proof is on the defendant and the standard is the balance
of probabilities.
[3] The available amount as defined by section 159 is the total of the values of all
the free property then held by the defendant minus the total amount payable in
To continue reading
Request your trial