British
and Irish Legal Information Institute
Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[
Home]
[
Databases]
[
World Law]
[
Multidatabase Search]
[
Help]
[
Feedback]
England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions
You are here:
BAILII >>
Databases >>
England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions >>
Adam & Anor, R v [2011] EWCA Crim 865 (01 April 2011)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2011/865.html
Cite as:
[2011] EWCA Crim 865
[
New search]
[
Printable RTF version]
[
Help]
|
|
Neutral Citation Number: [2011] EWCA Crim 865 |
|
|
2009/2246C5 – 200902576C5 |
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE CROWN COURT AT DERBY
HHJ BURGESS
T20050185-6 & T20050186-5
|
|
Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL |
|
|
01/04/2011 |
B e f o r e :
LORD JUSTICE HOOPER
MR JUSTICE OPENSHAW
and
MR JUSTICE SWEENEY
____________________
Between:
|
Maqbul Adam & Altaf Umarji
|
Appellants
|
|
- and -
|
|
|
The Crown
|
Respondent
|
____________________
Mr Joseph Ganner appeared for the Appellants.
Mr Andrew Bird appeared for the Respondent.
Date of decision: 20th January 2011
____________________
HTML VERSION OF JUDGMENT
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
LORD JUSTICE HOOPER :
- On 20th January 2011 the Full Court granted the appellants an extension of time and leave to appeal against their confiscation orders.
- The Court adjourned the hearing of the appeal to a date to be fixed and directed that the appellants and respondent complete service of further submissions by 3rd March 2011.
- The respondent now accepts that the appeals should be allowed to the extent of quashing the original confiscation orders.
- Both parties are content for us to resolve the appeal without an oral hearing.
- The Crown contends and the appellants concede that a substituted confiscation order should be imposed in respect of the appellants in the following terms:
i) A finding that each appellant benefited in the sum of £16,250 (the value of the cigarettes and VAT);
ii) A confiscation order be made against each appellant in that same sum.
- We agree.
- There is some disagreement about the period in default and the period after which the payment must be made.
- In our view the order which should be made is:
i) A period of 9 months imprisonment be imposed in default;
ii) That payment of the order be made within 6 months.
- The Court accordingly quashes the existing confiscation orders and substitutes an order against each appellant in these four terms.
- The Court is grateful for help from both counsel and the Criminal Appeal Office in the resolution of these appeals.