Elie Taktouk v R

Elie Taktouk v R

Fresh evidence from Dr. Wassim Taktouk is admissible and may affect the assessment of available assets; the confiscation order is quashed and Crown Court must proceed afresh to determine the available amount, but benefit figure stands.

Parties
Appellant: Elie Taktouk; Respondent: The King; Private Prosecutor: Benherst Finance Limited; Private Prosecutor: Chestone Industry Holding
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Confiscation Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; confiscation order quashed; Crown Court to proceed afresh on available amount only.
Legal Topics
Confiscation Order, Fresh Evidence, Disclosure, Fraud, Benefit Calculation, Available Amount
Criminal Law Proceeds of Crime Confiscation Order Fresh Evidence Disclosure Fraud Benefit Calculation Available Amount

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

Parties

Elie Taktouk

Appellant

The King

Respondent

Benherst Finance Limited

Private Prosecutor

Chestone Industry Holding

Private Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Confiscation Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether fresh evidence should be admitted regarding available assets
  2. 2 Whether non-disclosure of investigator reports affected fairness
  3. 3 Whether benefit figure should be reduced due to recovery from third party

Ratio Decidendi

Fresh evidence from Dr. Wassim Taktouk is admissible and may affect the assessment of available assets; the confiscation order is quashed and Crown Court must proceed afresh to determine the available amount, but benefit figure stands.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; confiscation order quashed; Crown Court to proceed afresh on available amount only.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal on Grounds 1 and 2 refused.
  • Leave to appeal on Ground 3 granted; appeal allowed; confiscation order quashed under section 11(3)(a) Criminal Appeal Act 1968.