James & Anor v R [2011] EWCA Crim 2991 (21 December 2011)

James & Anor v R [2011] EWCA Crim 2991 (21 December 2011)

Neither appellant obtained a benefit equal to the unpaid excise duty or expenses incurred, as James was not shown to have a proprietary interest or liability for duty, and Blackburn acted as a manager without ownership or financial stake; expenses incurred by Blackburn were not caught by the legislation as benefit.

Citation
[2011] EWCA Crim 2991
Parties
Appellant: Michael James; Appellant: Raymond Francis Blackburn; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Confiscation Orders
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Confiscation Orders, Benefit From Criminal Conduct, Excise Duty Evasion, Liability for Duty, Expenses as Benefit

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

Parties

Michael James

Appellant

Raymond Francis Blackburn

Appellant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Confiscation Orders

  1. 1 Whether the appellants obtained a benefit from criminal conduct for the purposes of confiscation orders
  2. 2 Whether unpaid excise duty and expenses incurred constitute benefit under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002

Ratio Decidendi

Neither appellant obtained a benefit equal to the unpaid excise duty or expenses incurred, as James was not shown to have a proprietary interest or liability for duty, and Blackburn acted as a manager without ownership or financial stake; expenses incurred by Blackburn were not caught by the legislation as benefit.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Confiscation orders against Michael James and Raymond Francis Blackburn quashed