May & Ors, R. v

May & Ors, R. v

The period for payment of a confiscation order runs from the date the order is made, regardless of pending appeals, and appellants are not entitled to extensions due to appeal proceedings. Variation of payment periods is only justified in exceptional circumstances, not merely due to time consumed by appeals.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Raymond George May; Appellant: Steven Lawrence; Appellant: Herbert Fowles; Appellant: Jacques Bravard; Appellant: Vincent John Stapleton
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 February 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Post Judgment, Determination of 'time to Pay' and Leave to Appeal Issues
Outcome
Appeal by May dismissed; appeals by Stapleton, Bravard, and Fowles allowed in part with reduced confiscation amounts and revised payment periods.
Legal Topics
Confiscation Orders, Time to Pay, Default Imprisonment, Leave to Appeal, Public Interest Immunity, Benefit Under Criminal Justice Act 1988
Criminal Law Confiscation Orders Time to Pay Default Imprisonment Leave to Appeal Public Interest Immunity Benefit Under Criminal Justice Act 1988

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Raymond George May

Appellant

Steven Lawrence

Appellant

Herbert Fowles

Appellant

Jacques Bravard

Appellant

Vincent John Stapleton

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Post Judgment, Determination of 'time to Pay' and Leave to Appeal Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 When does the period for payment of a confiscation order commence?
  2. 2 Should the period for payment be varied due to time consumed by appeals?
  3. 3 Is the benefit under section 71(4) and 71(5) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 the value of jointly obtained property?

Ratio Decidendi

The period for payment of a confiscation order runs from the date the order is made, regardless of pending appeals, and appellants are not entitled to extensions due to appeal proceedings. Variation of payment periods is only justified in exceptional circumstances, not merely due to time consumed by appeals.

Court Disposition

Appeal by May dismissed; appeals by Stapleton, Bravard, and Fowles allowed in part with reduced confiscation amounts and revised payment periods.

Orders

  • May: £3,264,277 to be paid by 2 August 2005, six years imprisonment in default.
  • Stapleton: £1,615,789 to be paid by 2 August 2005, four years imprisonment in default.