MacKle & Ors, R v [2014] NICC 24 (8 December 2014)

MacKle & Ors, R v [2014] NICC 24 (8 December 2014)

The basis of the confiscation rehearings must not conflict with the basis of sentencing for each defendant, as defined by their particular criminal conduct and roles as recorded in the Supreme Court decision. No effective reservations were made by the prosecution at sentencing, so the prosecution is bound by the sentencing basis in the confiscation rehearings.

Citation
[2014] NICC 24
Parties
Prosecution: The Queen; Defendant: Patrick Mackle; Defendant: Benedict Mackle; Defendant: Plunkett Jude Mackle; Defendant: Henry McLaughlin
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
08 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Preliminary Ruling on Scope of Confiscation Rehearing After Supreme Court Remittal
Outcome
Preliminary ruling—confiscation rehearings must proceed on the basis of sentencing; prosecution bound by sentencing basis absent clear reservation.
Legal Topics
Confiscation Orders, Basis of Plea, Remittal, Criminal Conduct, Sentencing, Statutory Assumptions
Criminal Law Proceeds of Crime Confiscation Orders Basis of Plea Remittal Criminal Conduct Sentencing Statutory Assumptions

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Prosecution

Patrick Mackle

Defendant

Benedict Mackle

Defendant

Plunkett Jude Mackle

Defendant

Henry McLaughlin

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Preliminary Ruling on Scope of Confiscation Rehearing After Supreme Court Remittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Crown Court may revisit the factual basis for confiscation orders after Supreme Court remittal
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution is bound by the basis of plea at sentencing in confiscation proceedings absent a clear reservation
  3. 3 Whether new evidence or arguments may be introduced at the confiscation rehearing

Ratio Decidendi

The basis of the confiscation rehearings must not conflict with the basis of sentencing for each defendant, as defined by their particular criminal conduct and roles as recorded in the Supreme Court decision. No effective reservations were made by the prosecution at sentencing, so the prosecution is bound by the sentencing basis in the confiscation rehearings.

Court Disposition

Preliminary ruling—confiscation rehearings must proceed on the basis of sentencing; prosecution bound by sentencing basis absent clear reservation.

Orders

  • Application for cross-examination of Mr McCollum refused as unnecessary.
  • McLaughlin confiscation rehearing to be dealt with by Weatherup J; Mackle cases by Deeny J.