AG v Lagadu [2000] JRC 228 (17 November 2000)
- Citation
- [2000] JRC 228
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Posture
- Criminal / Sentencing
More details
- Posture
- Criminal / Sentencing
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The defendant's cooperation, repayment of arrears, and acknowledgment of offences warranted a slight modification of the Crown Advocate's recommendations, but fines and costs were still imposed to reflect the seriousness of the offences and deter similar conduct.
Court disposition
convicted and sentenced
Orders
- Fined £300 on each principal charge
- Fined £25 on each offence for breach of order
- Total fine of £5,525
- 34 weeks' imprisonment in default of payment
- Pay £1,000 towards prosecution costs
- Fine to be paid at £50 per week
02
Material facts
Parties
Mr Lagadu
DefendantCrown Advocate
Prosecutor Counsel: Crown AdvocateAmounts and remedies
- Total Fine: GBP 5,525
- Imprisonment in Default (weeks): 34
- Prosecution Costs: GBP 1,000
- Weekly Payment Rate: GBP 50
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
What is the appropriate sentence for failure to pay social security contributions over a prolonged period?
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The defendant acknowledged the offences, cooperated with authorities, and has repaid the arrears to the Social Security Fund.
- Respondent
- The Crown Advocate sought fines for each principal charge and each breach, as well as imprisonment in default and prosecution costs.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
court's reasoning
Failure to pay social security contributions imposes a burden on other contributors and may result in benefit to the offender via interest on unpaid sums.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The defendant's cooperation, repayment of arrears, and acknowledgment of offences warranted a slight modification of the Crown Advocate's recommendations, but fines and costs were still imposed to reflect the seriousness of the offences and deter similar conduct.
Court disposition
convicted and sentenced
- Fined £300 on each principal charge
- Fined £25 on each offence for breach of order
- Total fine of £5,525
- 34 weeks' imprisonment in default of payment
- Pay £1,000 towards prosecution costs
- Fine to be paid at £50 per week
Source and reliance status
Official court record
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Court record
Judgment
JUDGMENT THE BAILIFF: 1. The vice of offences under the Social Security Law is the prospective burden which those who fail to pay their Social Security Contributions place upon other contributors to the Fund. In addition, because of the long period of time during which this failure to comply with the obligation has continued there has been a benefit, albeit small perhaps, in terms of interest on unpaid contributions.
2. Nonetheless we take into account that the defendant has now put himself in order with the Social Security Fund and has repaid the arrears. We also take into account that there has been an immediate acknowledgement that the offences were committed and co-operation with the investigating authorities. We give weight to that and we are prepared to modify slightly the conclusions of the Crown Advocate.
3. Mr Lagadu, you will be fined on each of the principal charges, the sum of £300, and on each of the offences for breach of the order the sum of £25, making a total fine of £5,525 and as moved for by the Crown Advocate, 34 weeks' imprisonment in default of payment. Furthermore, you will pay £1,000 towards the prosecution costs. We order that the fine be paid at the rate of £50 per week. Authorities A. G -v- Hall (20 th July, 1990) Jersey Unreported. A. G. -v- Houghton (25 th February, 1994) Jersey Unreported. Page Last Updated: 19 Aug 2015 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.