Fields & Ors v R.

Fields & Ors v R.

In cases of joint benefit, each co-principal conspirator is liable for the full amount of the benefit obtained, and confiscation orders in the full amount are not disproportionate under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 and Article 1 of the First Protocol. Apportionment is not permitted. The judge's findings on available assets and refusal to stay proceedings due to delay were upheld.

Parties
Appellant: Michael Fields; Appellant: Mitesh Sanghani; Appellant: Karamjit Sagoo; Appellant: Wasim Rajput; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal of Fields allowed in part; appeals of Sanghani, Sagoo, and Rajput dismissed.
Legal Topics
Confiscation Orders, Joint Benefit, Apportionment, Proportionality, Criminal Lifestyle, Available Amount, Delay and Abuse of Process
Criminal Law Proceeds of Crime Confiscation Orders Joint Benefit Apportionment Proportionality Criminal Lifestyle Available Amount +1 more

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Fields

Appellant

Mitesh Sanghani

Appellant

Karamjit Sagoo

Appellant

Wasim Rajput

Appellant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether joint conspirators' benefit under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 should be apportioned or valued in full for each
  2. 2 Whether confiscation orders in the full amount are disproportionate under Article 1 of the First Protocol
  3. 3 Whether the available amount was properly assessed

Ratio Decidendi

In cases of joint benefit, each co-principal conspirator is liable for the full amount of the benefit obtained, and confiscation orders in the full amount are not disproportionate under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 and Article 1 of the First Protocol. Apportionment is not permitted. The judge's findings on available assets and refusal to stay proceedings due to delay were upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal of Fields allowed in part; appeals of Sanghani, Sagoo, and Rajput dismissed.

Orders

  • Confiscation order for Fields reduced to £1,565,945 with default period adjusted to seven years' imprisonment.
  • Confiscation orders for Sanghani and Sagoo in the full amount of £1,650,591 each upheld.