AP U Ltd v Crown Prosecution Service & Anor [2007] EWCA Crim 3128 (20 December 2007)

AP U Ltd v Crown Prosecution Service & Anor [2007] EWCA Crim 3128 (20 December 2007)

Section 41(4) of POCA is not incompatible with Article 1 of the First Protocol or Article 6 ECHR. Parliament was entitled to prohibit the use of restrained funds for legal expenses in criminal/confiscation proceedings and to require reliance on public funding. The measure is proportionate and within Parliament's discretionary area of judgment. Any individual unfairness can be addressed under Article 6 if and when it arises. The appeal for a declaration of incompatibility is dismissed.

Citation
[2007] EWCA Crim 3128
Parties
Appellant: AP; Appellant: U Limited; Respondent: Crown Prosecution Service; Respondent: Revenue & Customs Prosecution Office; Interveners: Ministry of Justice and the Home Office
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 December 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; Crown's appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, Restraint Orders, Legal Expenses, Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR, Article 6 ECHR, Declaration of Incompatibility
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 Restraint Orders Legal Expenses Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR Article 6 ECHR Declaration of Incompatibility

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

Parties

AP

Appellant

U Limited

Appellant

Crown Prosecution Service

Respondent

Revenue & Customs Prosecution Office

Respondent

Ministry of Justice and the Home Office

Interveners

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 41(4) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 is compatible with Article 1 of the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
  2. 2 Whether section 41(4) of POCA is compatible with Article 6 ECHR (right to a fair trial and access to legal representation)
  3. 3 Whether funds subject to restraint orders can be released for legal expenses in criminal/confiscation proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

Section 41(4) of POCA is not incompatible with Article 1 of the First Protocol or Article 6 ECHR. Parliament was entitled to prohibit the use of restrained funds for legal expenses in criminal/confiscation proceedings and to require reliance on public funding. The measure is proportionate and within Parliament's discretionary area of judgment. Any individual unfairness can be addressed under Article 6 if and when it arises. The appeal for a declaration of incompatibility is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; Crown's appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Refusal to make a declaration of incompatibility under the Human Rights Act 1998
  • Refusal to vary restraint orders to permit use of restrained funds for legal expenses in criminal/confiscation proceedings