Glaves v Crown Prosecution Service

Glaves v Crown Prosecution Service

A defendant is not precluded as a matter of law from pursuing an application for a certificate of inadequacy merely because he cannot account for previously unidentified or 'hidden' assets included in a confiscation order. The court must consider all the evidence and may grant a hearing if the defendant can demonstrate, on the balance of probabilities, that his realisable property is now inadequate, even if he cannot fully explain the fate of all assets.

Parties
Respondent: Alan Glaves; Appellant: Crown Prosecution Service
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Appeal From Administrative Court Decision on Preliminary Issue of Law
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Confiscation Orders, Certificate of Inadequacy, Burden of Proof, Hidden Assets
Criminal Law Proceeds of Crime Confiscation Orders Certificate of Inadequacy Burden of Proof Hidden Assets

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alan Glaves

Respondent

Crown Prosecution Service

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Appeal From Administrative Court Decision on Preliminary Issue of Law

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an applicant for a certificate of inadequacy is precluded as a matter of law from succeeding if he cannot account for previously unidentified or 'hidden' assets included in a confiscation order.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent is entitled to a hearing of his application for a certificate of inadequacy despite a finding of hidden assets.

Ratio Decidendi

A defendant is not precluded as a matter of law from pursuing an application for a certificate of inadequacy merely because he cannot account for previously unidentified or 'hidden' assets included in a confiscation order. The court must consider all the evidence and may grant a hearing if the defendant can demonstrate, on the balance of probabilities, that his realisable property is now inadequate, even if he cannot fully explain the fate of all assets.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The respondent is entitled to a hearing of his application for a certificate of inadequacy.