Adams v Crown Prosecution Service (CPS)

Adams v Crown Prosecution Service (CPS)

The appellant failed to discharge the burden of proving his realisable property was inadequate to satisfy the outstanding confiscation order. The judge was entitled to find, based on the evidence and the unsatisfactory explanations for the source of funds and expenditure, that the appellant had an undisclosed reserve of funds. The judge's findings were reasonable and involved no error of law.

Parties
Appellant: Adams; Respondent: Crown Prosecution Service
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Refusal of Certificate of Inadequacy
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Confiscation Order, Certificate of Inadequacy, Burden of Proof, Realisable Assets, Concealment of Assets
Criminal Law Proceeds of Crime Confiscation Order Certificate of Inadequacy Burden of Proof Realisable Assets Concealment of Assets

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Adams

Appellant

Crown Prosecution Service

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Refusal of Certificate of Inadequacy

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant discharged the burden of proving his realisable property was inadequate for payment of the outstanding confiscation order
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in law or fact in finding the appellant had undisclosed assets
  3. 3 Whether the judge was entitled to treat the expenditure of the appellant's wife as evidence of the appellant's undisclosed assets

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant failed to discharge the burden of proving his realisable property was inadequate to satisfy the outstanding confiscation order. The judge was entitled to find, based on the evidence and the unsatisfactory explanations for the source of funds and expenditure, that the appellant had an undisclosed reserve of funds. The judge's findings were reasonable and involved no error of law.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed