����Ӱ��

View the related practice notes about Actus reus

Principal money laundering offences—mens rea, criminal property and criminal conduct

Principal money laundering offences—mens rea, criminal property and criminal conduct Understanding what may constitute criminal property is critical to understanding the principal money laundering offences under sections 327, 328 and 329 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA 2002). Each of these offences require that a person does something with criminal property with the requisite mens rea ie they: • conceal, disguise, convert or transfer what they know or suspect to be criminal property or remove what they know or suspect to be criminal property from the jurisdiction (POCA 2002, s 327) • enter into or become concerned in an arrangement that they know or suspect facilitates (by whatever means) the acquisition, retention, use or control of criminal property, by or on behalf of another person (POCA 2002, s 328) • acquire, use or possess what they know or suspect to be criminal property (POCA 2002, s 329) For detailed guidance on these offences, see Practice Notes: • Money laundering offences—concealing, disguising, converting, transferring...

Joint enterprise and secondary liability

Joint enterprise and secondary liability This Practice Note is concerned with secondary liability, sometimes called accessory liability: the liability that attaches to parties to a joint enterprise. In criminal law, where two or more parties embark on a joint enterprise, as either a principal or secondary party, each will be liable for acts committed in pursuance of that joint enterprise with the necessary intent, unless the principal goes beyond the scope of what was agreed. In the 2016 cases of R v Jogee and Ruddock v The Queen, the Supreme Court clarified and restored the test for the mental element of intent which must be established when a defendant is accused of being a secondary party to a crime, see News Analysis: Supreme Court rules on ‘joint enterprise’. Historically, a secondary party could be held responsible for a crime committed by a primary party if the secondary party foresaw the possibility of the primary party committing the crime. This was known as...