*/
Sentence – Confiscation order. The defendant had satisfied a confiscation order against him under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. Over six years later, the judge imposed a further confiscation order. The defendant appealed. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that the judge had taken an unexceptional approach to the case and that the further confiscation order had been neither wrong nor manifestly excessive.
Sentence – Confiscation order. The defendant had satisfied a confiscation order against him under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. Over six years later, the judge imposed a further confiscation order. The defendant appealed. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, in dismissing the appeal, held that the judge had taken an unexceptional approach to the case and that the further confiscation order had been neither wrong nor manifestly excessive.
The beginning of the legal year offers the opportunity for a renewed commitment to justice and the rule of law both at home and abroad
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management sets out the key steps to your dream property
A centre of excellence for youth justice, the Youth Justice Legal Centre provides specialist training, an advice line and a membership programme
By Kem Kemal of Henry Dannell
By Ashley Friday of AlphaBiolabs
Providing bespoke mortgage and protection solutions for barristers
Joanna Hardy-Susskind speaks to those walking away from the criminal Bar
Tom Cosgrove KC looks at the government’s radical planning reform and the opportunities and challenges ahead for practitioners
From a traumatic formative education to exceptional criminal silk – Laurie-Anne Power KC talks about her path to the Bar, pursuit of equality and speaking out against discrimination (not just during Black History Month)
James Onalaja concludes his two-part opinion series
Yasmin Ilhan explains the Law Commission’s proposals for a quicker, easier and more effective contempt of court regime
