Piercing the corporate veil

The defendant had pleaded guilty to conspiring to cheat the Public Revenue and a confiscation order of £3 246 277 was made against him.

A company Larkfield Limited made claims to the defendant’s realisable assets including ownership of a flat in London valued at approximately £450 000.

G claimed that he was the owner of the company and also in practice the flat. But even if that were wrong it was claimed that a distinction had to be made between the approach to be taken towards assets which were the subject of a confiscation order but which were not themselves the proceeds of crime such as the flat as against assets that were the direct proceeds of crime.

HMRC contended that the defendant had provided the money for the purchase of the flat and that the company held it on trust...