R v Khuram Janjua

R v Khuram Janjua

The applicant's argument regarding the original benefit figure was not open to him, as it was not raised before the judge, was conclusively determined by the Court of Appeal in 2021, and the agreed benefit figure was a just compromise. The double counting grounds were not pursued. The renewed application for leave to appeal was refused.

Parties
Prosecutor: Rex; Applicant: Khuram Janjua
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Variation of Confiscation Order
Outcome
Renewed application for leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Confiscation Order, Variation of Confiscation Order, Extension of Time, Benefit Figure, Double Counting

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecutor

Khuram Janjua

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Variation of Confiscation Order

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in failing to reconsider the original benefit figure in light of R v Waya [2012] UKSC 51
  2. 2 Whether the variation of the confiscation order was correct under section 22 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002
  3. 3 Whether there was double counting in the calculation of the available amount

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's argument regarding the original benefit figure was not open to him, as it was not raised before the judge, was conclusively determined by the Court of Appeal in 2021, and the agreed benefit figure was a just compromise. The double counting grounds were not pursued. The renewed application for leave to appeal was refused.

Court Disposition

Renewed application for leave to appeal refused