Re K

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date06 July 1990
Date06 July 1990
CourtQueen's Bench Division

Queen's Bench Division

Before Mr Justice McCullough

In re K

Criminal procedure - restraint order - value of property

Assessing value of property in restraint order cases

In assessing the value of property obtained from the proceeds of a criminal offence for the purposes of making a restraint order under section 77 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, the court was concerned with the value of the property obtained and not the value of the equity.

Mr Justice McCullough so held in the Queen's Bench Division in a reserved judgment given in open court after a hearing in chambers in refusing an application brought by K for the discharge of a restraint order made ex parte under section 77 of the 1988 Act by Mr Justice Popplewell on May 21, 1990 restraining K from dealing with his assets and in particular from disposing of his interest in two properties.

Mr Barry Press for K; Mr Marcus Pollett for the prosecution.

MR JUSTICE McCULLOUGH said that K had been arrested on March 25, 1988 and had been charged with six offences of dishonesty between June 1987 and January 1988 while he was trading as an estate agent.

The substance of the allegations was that he and others had bought properties with the assistance of mortgages which had been procured by making false statements about the applicant's earnings and employment and by means of false references.

On K's behalf it was accepted that there were reasonable grounds for thinking that he might be convicted of the offences with which he had been charged, but it was denied that the other requirements were met.

The High Court could make a restraint order (section 77(1)) against any defendant against whom proceedings for a relevant offence had been instituted (section 76(1)(a)) but not concluded if it appeared that there were reasonable grounds for thinking that a confiscation order might be made (section 76(1)(c)), that is, that there were reasonable grounds for thinking (i) that he would be found guilty of such an offence; (ii) that the court would be satisfied that, as a result of, or in connection with, the commission of that offence, he had obtained property worth at least £10,000 (section 71(2)(b)(i),(ii),(4),(6),(7)); (iii) that the market value of the property in which he alone held an interest (section 74(4)(b)) and the market value of his beneficial interest in property in which another person also held an interest, less the amount required to discharge any encumbrance (other than a charging order) on his interest...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Commissioners of Customs and Excise v A
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 22 Julio 2002
    ...Mr. A's interest in the former matrimonial home and the two policies. At the same time, he discharged a restraint order (the equivalent of a Mareva injunction) made by Toulson J on 26 September 1997 under section 26 DTA 1994 in relation to Mr. A's assets. He also discharged the Receiver app......
  • Crown Prosecution Service (Nottinghamshire) v Rose
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 21 Febrero 2008
    ...in paragraph (b) above, so far as it represents the property which he obtained, but disregarding any charging order.” 52 It was held in In re K, The Times, 1 October 1990, that determining the value of the benefit under s.71(4) gave rise to the simple question “what property did he obtain?......
  • R v Glatt (Louis)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 17 Marzo 2006
    ...the figures given to us are respectively £546,519.62 and £645,024.37, a total of £1,291,543.99. 151 The Judge was referred to Re K The Times 1 October 1990, of which we have the full judgment in the form of a Lexis print out. In that case McCullough J was asked to discharge a restraint orde......
  • R v Walls (Andrew)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 30 Octubre 2002
    ...Act 1986. We were however referred to two decisions in relation to confiscation proceedings under the Criminal Justice Act 1988, namely re K (McCullough J, unreported, 6 July 1990) and Layode (in this court, unreported, 12 March 1993). Though both unreported, we were told by counsel on both......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Values versus interests in the explanation of social conflict.
    • United States
    • University of Pennsylvania Law Review Vol. 144 No. 5, May 1996
    • 1 Mayo 1996
    ...& Carolyn W. Sherif, Reference Groups (1964). (103) See Nicholas D. Kristof, Lamas Seek the Holy Child, But Politics Intrude, N.Y. Times, Oct. 1, 1990, at A4. (104) See id. (105) See id. (106) See id. (107) See id. ("'China says that the reincarnation should be from Chinese territory, b......

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