McDowell & Anor v The Queen [2015] EWCA Crim 173 (19 February 2015)

McDowell & Anor v The Queen [2015] EWCA Crim 173 (19 February 2015)

Where the underlying activity is itself prohibited and criminalised (not merely the failure to obtain a licence), all receipts from such activity constitute benefit from criminal conduct under POCA. The court may attribute company receipts to the individual where the company is the alter ego of the offender, even...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] EWCA Crim 173
Parties
Appellant: Christopher James McDowell; Appellant: Harjit Sarana Singh; Respondent: The Queen
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Confiscation Orders
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; confiscation orders upheld.
Legal Topics
Confiscation Orders, Lifting the Corporate Veil, Proceeds of Crime, Proportionality Under ECHR, Criminal Lifestyle, Benefit From Criminal Conduct
Criminal Law Proceeds of Crime Company Law Human Rights Law Confiscation Orders Lifting the Corporate Veil Proportionality Under ECHR Criminal Lifestyle +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher James McDowell

Appellant

Harjit Sarana Singh

Appellant

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Confiscation Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether benefit obtained from trading while unlicensed/unregistered constitutes benefit from criminal conduct under POCA
  2. 2 Whether it was appropriate to lift the corporate veil to attribute company receipts to the individual appellants
  3. 3 Whether assessment of benefit as gross receipts is disproportionate under Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

Where the underlying activity is itself prohibited and criminalised (not merely the failure to obtain a licence), all receipts from such activity constitute benefit from criminal conduct under POCA. The court may attribute company receipts to the individual where the company is the alter ego of the offender, even without formal veil-piercing, if the individual is the sole controller and beneficiary. However, proportionality requires that benefit should not exceed the actual gain, and costs of lawful elements of trading may be considered to avoid disproportionate confiscation.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; confiscation orders upheld.

Orders

  • Confiscation orders in the sums of £292,499.60 (McDowell) and £176,218.11 (Singh) confirmed.
  • Benefit figures as assessed by the Crown Court stand for future section 22 POCA applications.