Evans, R v

Evans, R v

The delay in proceedings was reasonable given the complexity and actions of foreign authorities, and did not breach Article 6.1 rights; the confiscation order was properly made against the applicant without need for an Ahmed proviso; findings of fact regarding assets were open to the judge; the time-barred debt could still be considered an asset.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Applicant: Duncan Evans
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Confiscation Orders, Money Laundering, Delay in Proceedings, Human Rights (article 6)
Criminal Law Proceeds of Crime Confiscation Orders Money Laundering Delay in Proceedings Human Rights (article 6)

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Duncan Evans

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the delay in confiscation proceedings breached Article 6.1 rights to a hearing within a reasonable time
  2. 2 Whether the confiscation order should account for assets recovered by other orders (joint benefit)
  3. 3 Whether findings of fact regarding specific assets were irrational or unsupported by evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The delay in proceedings was reasonable given the complexity and actions of foreign authorities, and did not breach Article 6.1 rights; the confiscation order was properly made against the applicant without need for an Ahmed proviso; findings of fact regarding assets were open to the judge; the time-barred debt could still be considered an asset.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused