Company Directors, Shares and Confiscation

Directors Share Value Fluctuation Not
Subject To Confiscation Order
R v Rigby and another [2006] EWCA Crim 1653
CA
12 July 2006
Daily Law Notes Summary
A temporary unrealised increase in the value of a defendant’s
shareholding did not amount to a benefit nor a pecuniary advantage
for the purposes of imposing a confiscation order. Nor was there a
sufficient causal link between the salaries received by the
defendants in respect of their continued employment in the company
about which they had recklessly made a false and misleading
financial statement and that offence.