Peacock

Peacock

Section 16 of the Drug Trafficking Act 1994 allows the Crown Court to grant a certificate of increase in realisable assets by reference to assets acquired after the date of conviction, and the orders of Mitting J and Pitchford J were within jurisdiction.

Parties
Appellant: Peacock; Respondent: Crown Prosecution Service
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court Orders of Mitting J and Pitchford J
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Drug Trafficking, Confiscation Orders, Statutory Interpretation, After Acquired Assets
Criminal Law Proceeds of Crime Drug Trafficking Confiscation Orders Statutory Interpretation After Acquired Assets

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

Parties

Peacock

Appellant

Crown Prosecution Service

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court Orders of Mitting J and Pitchford J

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 16 of the Drug Trafficking Act 1994 allows the Crown Court to grant a certificate of increase in realisable assets by reference to assets acquired after the date of conviction (after-acquired assets)
  2. 2 Whether the orders of Mitting J and Pitchford J were made without jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

Section 16 of the Drug Trafficking Act 1994 allows the Crown Court to grant a certificate of increase in realisable assets by reference to assets acquired after the date of conviction, and the orders of Mitting J and Pitchford J were within jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.