Mr. F.P. Slewe

19 April 2022

Case number 19/04662 P

Double counting in confiscation of proceeds from human trafficking

Supreme Court reduced the amount itself

In these confiscation proceedings concerning proceeds from human trafficking, the court of appeal had counted one period twice, so that the amount was set too high. The Supreme Court upheld the complaint, corrected the double counting itself and further reduced the payment obligation because the cassation proceedings had taken too long.

A calculation error in the assessment of proceeds can be corrected directly in cassation, without new proceedings before the court of appeal.

Full judgment on rechtspraak.nl

15 January 2019

Case number 17/00362 P

Forfeited sums deducted from the confiscation order

Supreme Court reduced the payment obligation itself

In assessing the confiscation claim the court of appeal had failed to take account of sums of money already declared forfeited in the criminal case. That money had therefore already been taken and could not be counted again. The Supreme Court upheld the complaint and reduced the amount payable itself.

What has already been taken in the criminal case must be deducted in the confiscation proceedings.

Full judgment on rechtspraak.nl

26 September 2017

Case number 16/05545 P

Proceeds from money laundering must be established separately

Judgment quashed and case referred back

Following a conviction for habitual money laundering, the court of appeal assumed that the sums channelled through therefore also constituted unlawfully obtained proceeds as a matter of course. The Supreme Court rejected that view: the fact that someone has laundered money does not automatically mean that he benefited financially himself. That must be established and reasoned separately. The case was referred back.

A key judgment on when laundered money constitutes a benefit for the person concerned; the Supreme Court decided the same in the parallel case of a co-defendant (ECLI:NL:HR:2017:2501).

Full judgment on rechtspraak.nl

15 September 2015

Case number 14/00665 P

Calculation error in the estimate of the proceeds

Supreme Court corrected the estimate itself

In setting off costs the court of appeal had made an evident error, as a result of which the estimated proceeds and the payment obligation were set too high. The Supreme Court upheld the complaint and set the amount itself at the correct, lower level.

Illustrates that even an apparently technical calculation error can lead to a substantially lower payment obligation in cassation.

Full judgment on rechtspraak.nl