LESLIE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM - 60105/10 60113/10 - Communicated Case [2014] ECHR 513 (06 May 2014)

LESLIE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM - 60105/10 60113/10 - Communicated Case [2014] ECHR 513 (06 May 2014)

The applicants were found to have benefited from the property obtained during the theft, regardless of the prompt recovery and return of the goods. The confiscation orders were reduced on appeal to reflect apportionment between the two applicants, as imposing the full value on each would be disproportionate given...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] ECHR 513
Parties
Applicant: Thomas Richard Leslie; Applicant: Gerald Mooney; Respondent: The United Kingdom
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
06 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Application to the European Court of Human Rights / Communicated Case, Pre Judgment
Outcome
Communicated to the parties for observations; no final judgment rendered.
Legal Topics
Confiscation of Proceeds of Crime, Right to Fair Trial, Protection of Property, Proportionality of Penalties
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Confiscation of Proceeds of Crime Right to Fair Trial Protection of Property Proportionality of Penalties

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Thomas Richard Leslie

Applicant

Gerald Mooney

Applicant

The United Kingdom

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to the European Court of Human Rights / Communicated Case, Pre Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether confiscation orders against the applicants, after the stolen goods were recovered and returned, violated Article 6 (right to a fair trial) and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) of the European Convention on Human Rights
  2. 2 Whether the confiscation orders were disproportionate and amounted to multiple recovery
  3. 3 Whether there was an effective remedy under Article 13

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants were found to have benefited from the property obtained during the theft, regardless of the prompt recovery and return of the goods. The confiscation orders were reduced on appeal to reflect apportionment between the two applicants, as imposing the full value on each would be disproportionate given the circumstances. The domestic courts held that the confiscation regime was compatible with the Convention, but acknowledged that proportionality may require apportionment in exceptional cases.

Court Disposition

Communicated to the parties for observations; no final judgment rendered.