Kangs Solicitors win contested Confiscation Hearing at Warwick Crown Court.
The Prosecution argued that our client owned an available asset which could be realised and set against the benefit figure that had arisen from his criminal conduct.
The Trial Issue | Kangs Criminal Defence Solicitors
In the summer of 2016, our client pleaded guilty to supplying Class A drugs, with a number of other defendants.
The Crown’s case was overwhelming and, following his guilty plea, our client was sentenced to an immediate custodial sentence.
The Prosecution commenced Confiscation Proceedings in order to identify and recover any available assets as required by the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.
The vast majority of issues that arose were resolved between the parties.
However, there remained an area of contention relating to a motor vehicle registered to our client, which had been used in the supply of the drugs, and which the Crown asserted was both criminal property and an available asset which could be sold in order to reduce the financial benefit gained by our client.
Our client argued that the vehicle had been purchased by his parents for his use on the condition that he remained in full time education but that upon him breaching that condition, by ceasing full time education, his parents revoked the gift and took the vehicle off him.
In these circumstances we argued that the vehicle was not an available asset.
Contested Confiscation Hearing | Available Assets – Conditional Gifts
Prior to the contested Hearing, the Crown consistently refused to accept that the vehicle was purchased by our client’s parents and that it was a conditional gift.
The matter was eventually listed for a final Hearing, where the Prosecution sought to persuade the Court that (1) the vehicle was criminal property and if the Court determined it was not criminal property, then (2) it was an outright gift to our client which meant full legal title passed to him and ultimately, therefore, it was an available asset for the purpose of satisfying the final Confiscation Order.
Following oral evidence given by our client and his parents to the Court, it accepted that the gift of the vehicle had been subject to a condition which had been breached, that ownership remained with the parents and, accordingly, it was not an available asset for the purpose of satisfying the Confiscation Order.
How We Can Help | Kangs Confiscation Solicitors
Kangs Solicitors have a wealth of knowledge of Confiscation Proceedings with our team having advised and represented clients in some of the biggest Confiscation Proceeding actions in the country.
If you require any advice, assistance or representation on any aspect of Confiscation Proceedings or the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, then please contact our team through any of the following: