Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Preface
- Contents
- Table of Cases
- List of Abbreviations
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Substantive Provisions on Extended Confiscation
- Chapter 2 Legislative Action by the EU
- Chapter 3 Legislation in England and Wales
- Chapter 4 Legislation in Germany
- Chapter 5 Legislation in Sweden
- Chapter 6 Brief Overview of the Legislation in Norway, Denmark and Finland
- Chapter 7 Directive 2014/42/EU: A Reform with Significant Legal Changes?
- Part III The Legal Framework for International Cooperation
- Bibliography
- Index
- About the Author
Chapter 3 - Legislation in England and Wales
from Part II - Substantive Provisions on Extended Confiscation
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 October 2018
- Frontmatter
- Preface
- Contents
- Table of Cases
- List of Abbreviations
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Substantive Provisions on Extended Confiscation
- Chapter 2 Legislative Action by the EU
- Chapter 3 Legislation in England and Wales
- Chapter 4 Legislation in Germany
- Chapter 5 Legislation in Sweden
- Chapter 6 Brief Overview of the Legislation in Norway, Denmark and Finland
- Chapter 7 Directive 2014/42/EU: A Reform with Significant Legal Changes?
- Part III The Legal Framework for International Cooperation
- Bibliography
- Index
- About the Author
Summary
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LEGISLATION ON EXTENDED CONFISCATION IN ENGLAND AND WALES
The need for powers to confiscate the proceeds of crime in the context of a criminal conviction came into focus in the UK in connection with a police operation named “Julie” during 1978. Over years, several defendants had manufactured and sold large quantities of LSD. The police had seized cash, cars and other property to a value of £750,000, and it was claimed by the prosecution in the criminal proceedings that this represented the proceeds of narcotics offences. However, in the judgments which followed (e.g. the Cuthbertson case) the courts came to different conclusions. The first trial judge made an order for confiscation, which was upheld by the Court of Appeal. In the House of Lords this decision was “with considerable regret” overturned with the argument that the legislation in force did not permit the confiscation of the profits or proceeds of crime, but only regarded things “related to the offence”. The seized assets were thus returned to the defendants under public outcry. The government established the so-called Hodgson Committee with the task of giving proposals for a new confiscation regime. The report, which was published in 1984, recommended a new power of confiscation.
In 1986, provisions on the confiscation of the proceeds of crime were introduced by the Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986. This measure was initially only applicable in drug-trafficking cases, but was then extended by the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to also embrace any indictable offence and certain other offences. The purpose for adopting such legislation was to ensure that offenders were deprived of the proceeds from criminal conduct, and thereby also to create a certain deterrent effect, especially regarding serious organised crime. During the following years, the confiscation regime was extended by several new pieces of legislation, for example the Criminal Justice (International Cooperation) Act 1990, the Drug Trafficking Act 1994 and the Proceeds of Crime Act 1995.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Extended Confiscation in Criminal LawNational, European and International Perspectives, pp. 43 - 90Publisher: IntersentiaPrint publication year: 2017