Hulland, R.

Hulland, R.

The confiscation order was not disproportionate as the Recorder was not affirmatively satisfied that enforcement was impossible; the appellant's circumstances were not exceptional; the sale of the watches was a tainted gift and the value was properly assessed.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Nicholas Hulland
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Confiscation Order, Proceeds of Crime, Tainted Gift, Proportionality, Default Imprisonment
Criminal Law Confiscation Order Proceeds of Crime Tainted Gift Proportionality Default Imprisonment

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

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Nicholas Hulland

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the confiscation order was disproportionate under section 6(5) of POCA
  2. 2 Whether the sale of Rolex watches constituted a tainted gift under POCA
  3. 3 Whether the value of the tainted gift was correctly assessed

Ratio Decidendi

The confiscation order was not disproportionate as the Recorder was not affirmatively satisfied that enforcement was impossible; the appellant's circumstances were not exceptional; the sale of the watches was a tainted gift and the value was properly assessed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • confiscation order in the amount of £14,763 to be paid within three months or 12 months' imprisonment in default
  • compensation order in favour of the victim and King Brothers