header-logo header-logo

09 November 2022
Issue: 8002 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Fraud
printer mail-detail

Proceeds of crime: Confiscating ill-gotten gains

Major reforms to the system for recovering the proceeds of crime have been set out by the Law Commission.

The proposals, announced this week in a report, 'Confiscation of the Proceeds of Crime After Conviction', are the culmination of a Home Office-commissioned review. They aim to make confiscation orders more effective, recover a potential £8m more ill-gotten gains from offenders, and speed up the recovery system.

Law Commissioner Professor Penney Lewis said: ‘The current system for recovering the proceeds of crime is ineffective and letting down victims and the public.

‘By boosting enforcement powers, imposing more realistic and fairer orders, and speeding up proceedings, we can ensure greater public confidence in the system, and send a strong message that crime doesn’t pay.’

Under the reforms, strict timetables for hearings would be set so that confiscation proceedings take place immediately after the defendant is sentenced. Courts would be given powers to impose ‘contingent enforcement orders’ at the same time as making a confiscation order so the defendant’s assets, including their property and bank account, could be seized if proceeds are not paid back in time.

To prevent defendants hiding their assets, courts’ powers to impose ‘restraint orders’ would be strengthened by placing the ‘risk of dissipation’ test on a statutory footing. The factors for assessing a defendant as having a criminal lifestyle would be updated to take account of gains from their wider criminal conduct, and more attention would be paid to the defendant’s ability to pay.

The Commission also proposes that judges be able to adjust the funds that must be paid back, to avoid situations where there is no realistic prospect of recovering the full amount. Finally, the new confiscation regime would have a clear statutory objective to deprive defendants of their benefit from criminal conduct, rather than the objective of punishment.

Issue: 8002 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Fraud
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll