Evidence and Variation of Confiscation Orders: R v O'Flaherty (Carl Anthony) (Court of Appeal Criminal Division, 29th of October 2018)

Singh, C. 2018. Evidence and Variation of Confiscation Orders: R v O'Flaherty (Carl Anthony) (Court of Appeal Criminal Division, 29th of October 2018). International Commentary on Evidence . 15 (1), p. 20180004. doi:10.1515/ice-2018-0004

TitleEvidence and Variation of Confiscation Orders: R v O'Flaherty (Carl Anthony) (Court of Appeal Criminal Division, 29th of October 2018)
TypeJournal article
AuthorsSingh, C.
Abstract

The appellant (O'Flaherty) (O) was appealing against two confiscation orders. In short, this case demonstrates that a judge can increase the value of a confiscation order made pursuant to s. 22 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA) where adequate evidence is presented. The increase resulted from the fact that the Crown had discovered a further asset (property) that could be realized. O contended that a third party had an interest in the property and the value of the confiscation orders should not be increased. After questioning O and the third party the judge concluded that O's claim was not made out and the judge had not erred. The reasoning is of interest to all those in this field.

KeywordsConfiscation Orders, Law, Financial Crime, Proceeds of Crime
Article number 20180004
JournalInternational Commentary on Evidence
Journal citation15 (1), p. 20180004
ISSN1554-4567
Year2018
PublisherDe Grutyer
Publisher's version
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)doi:10.1515/ice-2018-0004
Publication dates
Published online24 Nov 2018

Related outputs

Bumped Redundancy and the Range of Reasonable Responses: To what Extent, if any, should Employers Consider Bumping? Life after Mirab v Mentor Graphics Limited UKEAT/0172/17DA
Singh, C. 2019. Bumped Redundancy and the Range of Reasonable Responses: To what Extent, if any, should Employers Consider Bumping? Life after Mirab v Mentor Graphics Limited UKEAT/0172/17DA. Issues in Legal Scholarship . 17 (1), p. 20190007. doi:10.1515/ils-2019-0007

Eliciting Best Evidence from a Child Witness: A Comparative Study of the United Kingdom and India
Singh, C. 2019. Eliciting Best Evidence from a Child Witness: A Comparative Study of the United Kingdom and India. Issues in Legal Scholarship . 17 (1), p. 20190003. doi:10.1515/ils-2019-0003

Criminal Evidence: Evidencing Defences to Murder. R v Goodwin (Anthony Gerard) [2018] EWCA Crim 2287
Singh, C. 2018. Criminal Evidence: Evidencing Defences to Murder. R v Goodwin (Anthony Gerard) [2018] EWCA Crim 2287. International Commentary on Evidence . 15 (1), p. 20180005. doi:10.1515/ice-2018-0005

Disability Discrimination: Obesity and the Court of Justice of the European Union’s decision in Karsten Kaltoft v Billund Kommune Case C-354/13 ECJ
Singh, C. 2018. Disability Discrimination: Obesity and the Court of Justice of the European Union’s decision in Karsten Kaltoft v Billund Kommune Case C-354/13 ECJ. Issues in Legal Scholarship . doi:10.1515/ils-2016-0250

The Panoply of Challenges Facing Modern Identification Evidence and the Evidentiary Reliability of Coincidental Forensics
Singh, C. 2017. The Panoply of Challenges Facing Modern Identification Evidence and the Evidentiary Reliability of Coincidental Forensics.

Unlocking Evidence. 3rd edition
Singh, C. and Ramjohn, M. 2016. Unlocking Evidence. 3rd edition. Routledge.

Evidential Challenges Posed by the Panoply of Biometrics: Is Biometric Voice Identification made any more reliable by Cell Site Analysis?
Singh, C. 2016. Evidential Challenges Posed by the Panoply of Biometrics: Is Biometric Voice Identification made any more reliable by Cell Site Analysis? Transnational Law Conference and Research Workshop / Showcase . Charles Darwin University, Australia Mar 2016

Should Justice Beware? Are the Current Forms of Voice Identification Reliable Enough to be Admitted in the UK’s Criminal Courts as Prosecution Evidence?
Singh, C. 2015. Should Justice Beware? Are the Current Forms of Voice Identification Reliable Enough to be Admitted in the UK’s Criminal Courts as Prosecution Evidence? 5th International Conference on Evidence Law and Forensic Science. University of Adelaide, Australia Jul 2015

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Should Justice Beware: A Review of Voice Identification Evidence in Light of Advances in Biometric Voice Identification Technology
Singh, C. 2015. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Should Justice Beware: A Review of Voice Identification Evidence in Light of Advances in Biometric Voice Identification Technology. International Commentary on Evidence . 11 (1), p. 1–28. doi:10.1515/ice-2014-0009

Evidence Q&A
Singh, C. 2015. Evidence Q&A. Abingdon, Oxon Routledge.

Law Express Questions and Answers: Employment Law
Singh, C. 2013. Law Express Questions and Answers: Employment Law. Pearson.

Biography and the Educative
Singh, C. 2012. Biography and the Educative. PhD thesis University of Southampton Faculty of Social and Human Sciences

Permalink - https://westminsterresearch.westminster.ac.uk/item/qv6wz/evidence-and-variation-of-confiscation-orders-r-v-o-flaherty-carl-anthony-court-of-appeal-criminal-division-29th-of-october-2018


Share this
Tweet
Email

Usage statistics

12 total views
7 total downloads
0 views this month
0 downloads this month
These values are for the period from September 2nd 2018, when this repository was created

Export as