R v Puvinder Singh Briah

R v Puvinder Singh Briah

The appeal was allowed on the first ground only: the four cheque payments to HMRC totalling £42,675.34 were properly evidenced and should be deducted from the available amount in the confiscation order. There was no double counting in the calculation of hidden assets. The hidden asset figure was reduced accordingly.

Parties
Appellant: Puvinder Singh Briah; Respondent: Rex
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Confiscation Order
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Confiscation Order, Money Laundering, Conspiracy, Hidden Assets, Double Counting, Fresh Evidence
Criminal Law Proceeds of Crime Confiscation Order Money Laundering Conspiracy Hidden Assets Double Counting Fresh Evidence

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Puvinder Singh Briah

Appellant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Confiscation Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether four cheque payments to HMRC should be deducted from the available amount in the confiscation order
  2. 2 Whether there was double counting in the calculation of hidden assets

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed on the first ground only: the four cheque payments to HMRC totalling £42,675.34 were properly evidenced and should be deducted from the available amount in the confiscation order. There was no double counting in the calculation of hidden assets. The hidden asset figure was reduced accordingly.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • The confiscation order is varied to reduce the available amount by £42,675.34, resulting in a revised hidden asset figure of £169,475.40.