[2008] EWCA Crim 2753 [2008] EWCA Crim 2753

In confiscation proceedings, a judge had exceeded his powers under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 s.17(3) by treating an offender who failed to serve a response to the prosecutor’s statement as accepting every allegation made in the statement, but failing to except allegations that the offender had benefited from his criminal conduct.

In a civil claim brought by the London School of Economics it was found, on a balance of probabilities, that the cogency of evidence justified a finding that a former employee had breached his fiduciary duty by accepting secret payments from companies who provided services to the School; but that in all the circumstances the evidence did not support any findings of fraud or otherwise in respect of alleged overcharging for minor telecommunications work.

It was quite wrong to introduce the principles of the law of contract into the trial of a person charged with a supply of drugs.