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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll