Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
"the court may, in making an assessment as regards a person under section 1(5) of this Act, make the following assumptions, except in so far as any of them may be shown to be incorrect in that person's case -
was received by him, at the earliest time at which he appears to the court to have held it, as a payment or reward in connection with the drug trafficking carried on by him;
(ii) above was met out of payments received by him in connection with drug trafficking carried on by him, and
have been received by him at any time as such a reward, he received the property free of any other interests in it."
In terms of section 3(1), a person's "proceeds of drug trafficking" are defined as any payments or other rewards received by him at any time in connection with drug trafficking carried on by him or another; and the value of these proceeds of drug trafficking is the aggregate of the values of the payments or other awards. The figure for proceeds contained in the prosecutor's Statement apparently derives from an application of these assumptions.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.