Att. Gen. v Bhojwani [2010] JLR 24 (06 November 2008)

Att. Gen. v Bhojwani [2010] JLR 24 (06 November 2008)

For a conviction under art. 34(1)(b), the prosecution must prove criminal conduct, that the property is or represents proceeds of that conduct, and that the conversion, transfer, or removal was for the purpose of avoiding prosecution or confiscation, but need not prove commission of a Schedule 1 offence.

Citation
[2010] JLR 24
Parties
Prosecutor: Attorney General; Defendant: Bhojwani
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
06 November 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial
Outcome
clarification of legal requirements for prosecution under art. 34(1)(b)
Legal Topics
Proceeds of Crime, Money Laundering, Burden of Proof
Criminal Law Proceeds of Crime Money Laundering Burden of Proof

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General

Prosecutor

Bhojwani

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What must the prosecution prove under Proceeds of Crime (Jersey) Law 1999, art. 34(1)(b)?
  2. 2 Is it necessary to prove commission of a Schedule 1 offence in Jersey for a conviction under art. 34(1)(b)?

Ratio Decidendi

For a conviction under art. 34(1)(b), the prosecution must prove criminal conduct, that the property is or represents proceeds of that conduct, and that the conversion, transfer, or removal was for the purpose of avoiding prosecution or confiscation, but need not prove commission of a Schedule 1 offence.

Court Disposition

clarification of legal requirements for prosecution under art. 34(1)(b)