Chen, R v

Chen, R v

Pension policies with no surrender value or immediate realisable value should not be treated as realisable assets for the purposes of a confiscation order under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002; only assets that can be realised at the time of the order should be included.

Parties
Appellant: Alan Keith Chen; Respondent: Regina (The Crown)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Confiscation Order, Valuation of Assets, Pension Policies, Market Value, Available Amount
Criminal Law Proceeds of Crime Confiscation Order Valuation of Assets Pension Policies Market Value Available Amount

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alan Keith Chen

Appellant

Regina (The Crown)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether pension policies with no surrender value should be treated as realisable assets for confiscation order purposes
  2. 2 How to value assets that cannot be immediately realised under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002

Ratio Decidendi

Pension policies with no surrender value or immediate realisable value should not be treated as realisable assets for the purposes of a confiscation order under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002; only assets that can be realised at the time of the order should be included.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Confiscation order varied to £100
  • Seven days' imprisonment in default of payment