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.
Parties
Michael James
Appellant
Raymond Francis Blackburn
Appellant
The Crown
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Confiscation Orders
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellants obtained a benefit from criminal conduct for the purposes of confiscation orders
- 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
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment