Dare v Crown Prosecution Service [2012] EWHC 2074 (Admin) (13 July 2012)
The arrangement between the appellant and Mick was too preparatory, as no price had been agreed and no prospective purchaser identified; thus, it did not facilitate the acquisition of criminal property by another person at the relevant time as required by section 328(1).
- Citation
- [2012] EWHC 2074 (Admin)
- Parties
- Claimant: Dare; Defendant: Crown Prosecution Service
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 13 July 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal by Way of Case Stated / High Court (administrative Court) Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed; conviction quashed.
- Legal Topics
- Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, Section 328(1), Arrangements Facilitating Acquisition of Criminal Property, Handling Stolen Goods
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Dare
Claimant
Crown Prosecution Service
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal by Way of Case Stated / High Court (administrative Court) Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant's conduct constituted an offence under section 328(1) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 by entering into an arrangement facilitating the acquisition of criminal property by another
Ratio Decidendi
The arrangement between the appellant and Mick was too preparatory, as no price had been agreed and no prospective purchaser identified; thus, it did not facilitate the acquisition of criminal property by another person at the relevant time as required by section 328(1).
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed; conviction quashed.
Orders
- Conviction under section 328(1) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 quashed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment