AG v Da Silva

CourtRoyal Court
JudgeThe Deputy Bailiff
Judgment Date03 March 2008
Neutral Citation[2008] JRC 33
Date03 March 2008

[2008] JRC 33


(Samedi Division)


M. C. St. J. Birt, Esq., Deputy Bailiff

The Attorney General
Duarte Nuno Gomes Da Silva

C. E. Whelan, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate H. Heath for the Defendant.


Drug Trafficking Offences (Jersey) Law 1988.

R v Sonajee [2006] 1 AC 340 .

Application to adjourn Confiscation Hearing.

The Deputy Bailiff

This matter came before me this morning having been adjourned from 25th February for legal argument. The background is as follows: On 17th August, 2007 the defendant pleaded guilty before this Court to an offence to supplying Class A drugs. Sentence was postponed until 26th November. On that occasion the Superior Number, Commissioner Hamon presiding, imposed a sentence of 5 years' imprisonment. The Court adjourned the Attorney General's application for a Confiscation Order until 26th February, 2008 in order that certain enquiries could be made in Madeira. The matter came before me on 25th February with a view to adjourning the case until 5th March because of difficulties in convening the Superior Number for 26th February. On that occasion it was pointed out to the prosecution that more than six months had passed since the date of conviction, namely 17th August, 2007. That period is relevant because of the terms of Article 4 of the Drug Trafficking Offences (Jersey) Law 1988 which confers upon the Court the power to postpone determination of whether a confiscation order should be made until after sentencing. Article 4(3) provides as follows:-

Unless it is satisfied that there are exceptional circumstances, the Court shall not specify a period which—

(a) by itself; or

(b) where there have been one or more previous postponements under paragraph ( 1) or (4), when taken together with the earlier specified period or periods ,

exceeds 6 months beginning with the date of conviction.”


It is accepted that the Court, on 26th November was not asked to and did not consider whether there were exceptional circumstances enabling it to postpone the making of a confiscation order beyond the six months period, which expired on 17th February, 2008. The issue therefore is whether the Court now has jurisdiction to make a confiscation order.


This sort of situation caused many difficulties in England in relation to the equivalent legislation in that jurisdiction and led to conflicting decisions, with some divisions of the Court of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Richard David Arthur v The Attorney General
    • Jersey
    • Court of Appeal
    • 29 January 2020
    ...JRC 175 R v Waya [2012] UKSC 36. R v Jawad [2013] 1 W.L.R. 3861 AG v Arthur [2019] JRC 113 R v Soneji [2005] UKHL 49 AG v De Silva [2008] JRC 033 Flynn v Reid [2012] (2) JLR 226 R v Nelson [2010] QB 678 R v Guraj [2017] 1 WLR 22 Application by the Attorney General to appeal a confiscati......
  • The Attorney General v Richard David Arthur
    • Jersey
    • Royal Court
    • 18 June 2019
    ...Crime (Jersey) Law 1999. Criminal Justice (Compensation Orders) (Jersey) Law 1994 R v Soneji [2005] UKHL 49 Attorney General v De Silva [2008] JRC 033 Re W, The Times November 15th 1990 Criminal Justice Act 1988 Re X [2005] QB 133 SFO V Lexi [2008] EWCA Crim 1443 Re O'Brien [2003] JLR 1 D......
  • Burby v Thompson and Bertram
    • Jersey
    • Royal Court
    • 14 August 2008
    ...Advocate M. J. Thompson for the Respondents. Authorities Loi (1880) sur la Propriété Foncière. R v Soneji [2006] 1 AC 340 . AG v Da Silva [2008] JRC 033 . Re Barker [1985-6] JLR 186 . Ansbacher (Channel Islands) Limited v HSBC Bank plc [2007] JCA 228 . Deputy Bailiff THE 1 The property of t......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT