Regina v Knights and another (Appellant) (On Appeal from the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division))

In the House of Lords, the appellants, Knights and another, challenged the validity of confiscation orders made against them. The central issue before the court was whether non-compliance with the statutory requirements for postponement in confiscation proceedings under the Criminal Justice Act 1988 could render the confiscation orders invalid. Specifically, the court had to decide if the failure to specify a period for the postponement of confiscation proceedings deprived the court of its jurisdiction to make such orders. The appellants argued that the initial postponement made by the trial judge on 16 October 2000 was invalid as it did not specify the period of the postponement, leading to further postponements that exceeded the six-month limit set by section 72A(3) of the Act.

The court examined the statutory language and previous cases to interpret the requirement for specifying the period of postponement. The Lords found that while the statute permitted the court to postpone proceedings, it did not mandate the specification of the exact period or date for the substantive hearing. The court held that it was sufficient for the judge to give directions for the service of statements and specify a date for the next listing or final hearing. However, the judge should have considered exceptional circumstances at the initial postponement if the set timetable risked exceeding the six-month limit. In this case, the judge should have addressed exceptional circumstances on 16 October 2000, considering his unavailability in mid-January. Despite the non-compliance, the court concluded that such an error should not invalidate the confiscation orders, provided the judge acted in good faith and exercised his power under section 72A in the appellants' case.

Ultimately, the House of Lords dismissed the appeal, answering the certified question in the negative and affirming the confiscation orders against the appellants.