Boughton -Fox v R.

Boughton -Fox v R.

The court refused leave for a second appeal against conviction as it lacked jurisdiction absent exceptional circumstances or CCRC referral. The confiscation order under POCA was invalid due to transitional provisions, and the court has power to substitute a CJA 1988 order. There was no abuse of process in obtaining or maintaining the restraint order, and substitution of a new order is not precluded in principle.

Parties
Appellant: Christopher Boughton-Fox; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Conviction and Appeal Against Confiscation Order
Outcome
Leave to appeal conviction refused; confiscation order under POCA to be quashed; directions given for further hearing to consider substituted order under CJA 1988.
Legal Topics
Appeals, Confiscation Orders, Abuse of Process, Restraint Orders, Transitional Provisions
Criminal Law Confiscation Proceedings Appeals Confiscation Orders Abuse of Process Restraint Orders Transitional Provisions

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 13
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher Boughton-Fox

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Conviction and Appeal Against Confiscation Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted for a second appeal against conviction
  2. 2 Whether the confiscation order under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 was valid
  3. 3 Whether the court should substitute a confiscation order under the Criminal Justice Act 1988

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused leave for a second appeal against conviction as it lacked jurisdiction absent exceptional circumstances or CCRC referral. The confiscation order under POCA was invalid due to transitional provisions, and the court has power to substitute a CJA 1988 order. There was no abuse of process in obtaining or maintaining the restraint order, and substitution of a new order is not precluded in principle.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal conviction refused; confiscation order under POCA to be quashed; directions given for further hearing to consider substituted order under CJA 1988.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal conviction refused.
  • Confiscation order under POCA quashed at end of resumed hearing.