Druce v R.

Druce v R.

The appeal was allowed only to the extent of correcting the benefit figure for double counting as conceded by the Crown. The judge's findings on hidden assets and tainted gifts were upheld as the appellant failed to provide credible evidence to the contrary.

Parties
Appellant: Lawrence Druce; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 January 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Confiscation Order After Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part, otherwise dismissed
Legal Topics
Money Laundering, Confiscation Orders, Benefit Assessment, Hidden Assets, Tainted Gifts
Criminal Law Proceeds of Crime Money Laundering Confiscation Orders Benefit Assessment Hidden Assets Tainted Gifts

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lawrence Druce

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Confiscation Order After Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the confiscation order included double counting of assets
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in finding the available amount included hidden assets and tainted gifts
  3. 3 Whether the benefit figure was correctly calculated

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed only to the extent of correcting the benefit figure for double counting as conceded by the Crown. The judge's findings on hidden assets and tainted gifts were upheld as the appellant failed to provide credible evidence to the contrary.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part, otherwise dismissed

Orders

  • Benefit figure reduced to £1,167,145.14 to correct double counting
  • Confiscation order otherwise upheld