Anthony Samuel Bond v R

Anthony Samuel Bond v R

The judge was entitled, on the evidence, to find that the appellant benefitted from the conspiracy to the extent of £15 million and to make a confiscation order in the sum of £1,839,317.20. There was no risk of double recovery or disproportionality.

Parties
Appellant: Anthony Samuel Bond; Respondent: REX
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Confiscation Order
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Confiscation Order, Benefit From Criminal Conduct, VAT Fraud, Sentencing, Double Recovery
Criminal Law Proceeds of Crime Confiscation Order Benefit From Criminal Conduct VAT Fraud Sentencing Double Recovery

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anthony Samuel Bond

Appellant

REX

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Confiscation Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge was entitled to determine the appellant's benefit from the conspiracy for the purposes of a confiscation order in the sum of £15 million
  2. 2 Whether there was sufficient evidence to support the finding of benefit
  3. 3 Whether the confiscation order was disproportionate or risked double recovery

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled, on the evidence, to find that the appellant benefitted from the conspiracy to the extent of £15 million and to make a confiscation order in the sum of £1,839,317.20. There was no risk of double recovery or disproportionality.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Confiscation order in the sum of £1,839,317.20 confirmed