*/
Fraud cases should be heard by a single combined court with a judge who deals with the civil and criminal aspects, a former senior prosecutor suggested.
In a speech, Economic crime: a new one-stop shop, Alison Levitt QC, now a partner at law firm Mishcon de Reya, told the Cambridge Economic Crime Symposium in September that there needed to be a ‘totally new legal approach’ to economic crime with a new branch of the court system – the Combined Fraud Court – to deal with it.
The one-stop shop, she said, would combine the civil and criminal systems in a single trial, so it would be quicker and cheaper, and mean victims only giving evidence once.
A specially qualified fraud judge would hear a single trial, using aspects of civil and criminal law, Levitt explained.
At the end of the trial, the judge would ask whether the jury is satisfied to the criminal standard that the defendant is guilty.
If so, the judge would go on to deal with sentencing, assessing and awarding damages, confiscating assets which represent the proceeds of the defendant’s crimes, and awarding costs.
If the jury is not sure of guilt, they are dismissed and the judge reverts to the civil procedure to determine the issue on the balance of probabilities.
Fraud cases should be heard by a single combined court with a judge who deals with the civil and criminal aspects, a former senior prosecutor suggested.
In a speech, Economic crime: a new one-stop shop, Alison Levitt QC, now a partner at law firm Mishcon de Reya, told the Cambridge Economic Crime Symposium in September that there needed to be a ‘totally new legal approach’ to economic crime with a new branch of the court system – the Combined Fraud Court – to deal with it.
The one-stop shop, she said, would combine the civil and criminal systems in a single trial, so it would be quicker and cheaper, and mean victims only giving evidence once.
A specially qualified fraud judge would hear a single trial, using aspects of civil and criminal law, Levitt explained.
At the end of the trial, the judge would ask whether the jury is satisfied to the criminal standard that the defendant is guilty.
If so, the judge would go on to deal with sentencing, assessing and awarding damages, confiscating assets which represent the proceeds of the defendant’s crimes, and awarding costs.
If the jury is not sure of guilt, they are dismissed and the judge reverts to the civil procedure to determine the issue on the balance of probabilities.
Update from the Chair of the Bar
By Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group
Modernising communication and collaboration at a leading Chancery set. A Zexi case study
How to build profile without compromising professional duties. By Naumaan Farooq, Co-Founder of Inked PR
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the role of cut-off levels, and the wider range of factors that must be considered when interpreting results for family court proceedings
Endometriosis Awareness North, a charity raising awareness of endometriosis and supporting those affected across the North of England, has received a £500 boost from AlphaBiolabs via the company’s Giving Back initiative
A decade of reviews and research has disrupted accepted thinking in the search for causality. Suicides following abuse have overtaken domestic homicides. Is the law keeping up? Professor Susan Edwards KC (Hon) examines recent cases and the obstacles to successful prosecution
The case against judge-only justice – and why efficiency is not enough. By Professor Leslie Thomas KC
Heritage as an anchor and a compass, finding our common humanity and embracing the power of the outsider – Melina Antoniadis’s lessons learnt
Seeing the full picture – Baljit Ubhey OBE outlines the CPS action plan to tackle violence against women and girls, offering insights directly relevant to courtroom practice
Lauren Fullerton examines the how, what and why of setting up a second chambers base
