PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 41087/98) against the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights (“the Commission”) under former Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a United Kingdom national, Mr Steven Phillips (“the applicant”), on 20 April 1998.

The applicant was represented by Mr R. James, a solicitor practising in Newport, Gwent, and by Mr R. Pearse Wheatley, a barrister practising in London. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms H. Fieldsend, of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

The applicant alleged, inter alia, that the statutory assumption made against him by the court which issued a confiscation order following his conviction for a drug offence violated his right to the presumption of innocence under Article 6 § 2 of the Convention.

The application was transmitted to the Court on 1 November 1998, when Protocol No. 11 to the Convention came into force (Article 5 § 2 of Protocol No. 11).

The application was allocated to the Fourth Section of the Court (Rule 52 § 1 of the Rules of Court). It was declared partly admissible on 30 November 2000 [Note by the Registry. The Court’s decision is obtainable from the Registry].

The applicant and the Government each filed observations on the merits (Rule 59 § 1).

A hearing took place in public in the Human Rights Building, Strasbourg, on 8 February 2001 (Rule 59 § 2). There appeared before the Court: (a) for the Government Ms H. Fieldsend, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Agent, Mr D. Perry, Counsel, Ms M. Dyson, Home Office, Mr P. Vallance, Home Office, Advisers; (b) for the applicant Mr R. Pearse Wheatley, Counsel, Mr Y. Chandarana, Junior Counsel, Mr R. James, Solicitor. The Court heard addresses by Mr Pearse Wheatley and Mr Perry.

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

On 27 June 1996, at Newport Crown Court, the applicant was convicted of being concerned in the importation in November 1995 of a large quantity of cannabis resin, contrary to section 170(2) of the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979. On 12 July 1996 he was sentenced to nine years’ imprisonment in respect of this offence. The applicant had previous convictions, but none in respect of a drug-related offence.

An inquiry was conducted into the applicant’s means, pursuant to section 2 of the Drug Trafficking Act 1994 (“the 1994 Act” – see below). On 15 May 1996 a Customs and Excise appointed drug financial investigation officer advised the applicant’s solicitors that he was carrying out an investigation into their client’s financial affairs and that he wished to interview him in order to assist the court in determining whether he had benefited from drug trafficking. The applicant declined to take part in the interview.

The investigation officer prepared a written statement pursuant to section 11 of the 1994 Act which was served on the applicant and filed with the court. In the statement the investigation officer observed that the applicant had no declared taxable source of income, although he was the registered owner of a house converted into four flats from which he had started a bed-and-breakfast business in December 1991. Examination of the applicant’s building society account showed cash and cheque deposits in the period from August 1994 to November 1995 totalling over 17,000 pounds sterling (GBP), which the investigation officer suggested might represent rental income from the four flats. The applicant was found to have become a director of a newsagents business in July 1992 of which his parents were the sole shareholders and to have bought a shop in September 1992 for GBP 28,493.25, of which GBP 12,200 was paid in cash. He was the registered owner of five cars, of an estimated total value of approximately GBP 15,000, and was found to have spent GBP 2,000 on a BMW 520i in October 1995, and approximately GBP 88,400 on expenses related to the November 1995 importation of cannabis (in respect of which he had been convicted). The investigation officer concluded that the applicant had benefited from drug trafficking and that the total benefit was GBP 117,838.27. In respect of the applicant’s realisable assets, the investigation officer observed: “The size of Phillips’ realisable assets is likely to be peculiarly within the defendant’s own knowledge and I feel it reasonable to suppose that any successful drug trafficker (in as much as the defendant is) may take care to ensure, so far as he can, that the proceeds of his trade will be hidden away so as to be untraceable. Examples include the fact that his business dealings are always conducted in cash, that no records are ever maintained, and that some assets, for example the BMW 520i, are registered in false names.”

The applicant filed a written statement in response, in which he denied having benefited from drug trafficking. He explained that in 1990-91 he had been convicted of car theft and required to pay GBP 25,000 to the insurance company which had indemnified the victims. He claimed that he had sold the house for GBP 50,000 to X in order to clear this debt and had used the GBP 12,000 residue from the sale to purchase the newsagents premises for his parents because he owed them money too. He denied owning any part in the newsagents business. When he was released from prison in April 1994 he began trading in telephones; this was the source of the GBP 17,000 in his building society account. He denied owning any of the cars registered in his name, claiming variously that each had been purchased and sold on behalf of a friend or stolen without insurance. In conclusion, he alleged that his only realisable assets were some GBP 200 in a building society account and the fittings of a garage rented from the local authority. The applicant filed documentary evidence and affidavits in support, primarily, of his claim no longer to own the house.

The investigation officer filed a second statement in accordance with section 11(1) of the 1994 Act. He stated, inter alia, that the applicant was still the owner of the house and that the conveyance to X had never been registered.

At the confiscation hearing in the Crown Court the applicant gave evidence and called witnesses. Giving judgment on 24 December 1996 the judge observed: “It is for the prosecution to establish, of course, on a balance of probabilities that he has benefited from drug trafficking, that is received any payment or reward in connection with drug trafficking. Here there is no direct evidence of that so the Crown invite me to make the assumptions required by section 4(3) of the Act, namely (a) that property held by him since his conviction, and property transferred to him since 18 November 1989, the appropriate date, was received as such a benefit; (b) that any expenditure of his since that date in 1989 was met out of payments received by him in connection with any drug trafficking carried on by him. I must do so unless either he shows on a balance of probabilities that the assumption is incorrect, or I am satisfied that there would be a serious risk of injustice to him if the assumption was made.” The judge commented generally that, in seeking to displace the assumption and to counter the prosecutor’s allegations, the applicant had failed to take obvious, ordinary and simple steps which would clearly have been taken if his account of the facts had been true. For example, instead of calling as witnesses the alleged purchaser of the house, X, and other individuals for whom he claimed to have bought and sold cars, the applicant had called only himself, his father and a solicitor.

The judge found the prosecution’s allegation that the applicant still owned the house to be correct and held that X’s purported purchase payment of GBP 50,000 had in fact been a benefit of drug trafficking. The judge stated: “The assumption to be made is plain, and the accused has neither shown that it is incorrect nor demonstrated a risk of injustice. There are real indications on the civil basis of proof that [X] was complicit in the crime of which the accused was convicted. They travelled to Jamaica together at about the time when arrangements for shipment of the load of compressed herbal cannabis would be likely to be made. A mobile phone at the heart of the arrangements for the haulage of the drugs was registered in the name of [X]. Just as the jury did not believe Mr Phillips, neither do I. What has happened here, in my judgment, is a device of just the sort providing a cover to explain the transfer of money which one would expect to find in concealing benefit from drug trafficking. There is an apparently ordinary, formal, commercial transfer of property, appropriately done through solicitors in the ordinary way, which has never ultimately been formally finalised, and my judgment is that it was indeed a sham, that the property ... is still owned by the accused ...”

The prosecution alleged that the applicant had received a further GBP 28,000 in cash from X. The applicant accepted that he had received this money, but claimed that X had merely been cashing a cheque drawn by the applicant’s father to buy out the applicant’s share in the family business for a total of GBP 50,000. In connection with this transaction, the judge observed: “No sensible explanation for the involvement of [X] in that cashing of that cheque was given to me at all, and it is impossible, in my judgment, to see any sensible reason other than that he did not cash a cheque; that it was a simple payment. It involves my disbelieving not only the accused but also his father, but I do. I think family loyalty has overcome his honesty. Although the accused now has no formal interest in the remaining shop premises from which the family business is conducted, I do not accept the account of himself and his father that he has no interest in the business. Even within a family I find the purchase of a share of a business for GBP 50,000 entirely without documentation simply unbelievable. Again, on the balance of probabilities it is a device to conceal the true reason for the payment by [X] to the accused of GBP 28,000 which was that it was a payment for drug trafficking.”

In respect of the applicant’s dealings with cars, the judge remarked: “Accepting his lowest estimates of those sums which he has paid out, a total of GBP 11,400 in cash is reached. He told the jury that he always dealt in cash in all his transactions, not only dealing with these but other transactions, he presenting himself to the jury as a general wheeler-dealer, having specialised at one stage in cars, more recently in mobile telephones, but willing to deal in anything which would offer a profit. He says he never kept records at all. He accepts and asserts that he dealt dishonestly in cars, as well as legitimately, and that is certainly so. He has been convicted during the relevant period of offences of dishonesty in relation to ringing cars and was sentenced to a substantial term of imprisonment in respect of that. There are also in the papers before me indications of earning legitimate commissions in ordinary sales of cars. But the fact that he may have had other sources of cash, both legitimate and illegitimate, does not, in my judgment, displace the second assumption in a case such as this where no sort of account, complete or partial, is available or possible. I have seen what must have been a fraction of his dealings, and I am satisfied that the GBP 11,400 must be treated as a benefit.”

The judge assessed the applicant to have benefited from drug trafficking to the extent of GBP 91,400. He next calculated the value of the realisable property held by the applicant as follows: “For the reasons that I have given above I am satisfied that [the applicant] is in fact the beneficial owner of [the house]. In the absence of a current valuation, but taking judicial notice of a recent modest recovery in the housing market after a long, flat period, I am satisfied that the GBP 50,000 which he said in evidence was what such a property was worth in 1992, that is to say during the long, flat period, I am satisfied that GBP 50,000 is a fair estimate of the likely net proceeds of a sale of that property now or in the relatively near future. Again for the reasons that I have given above, I am satisfied that the accused still has a one-third interest with his parents in the [newsagents business]. He and his father said that the business was worth GBP 150,000 in 1993. That is what was purported to be the basis of the GBP 50,000 he was to be given for it. There is no evidence that it is worth any less now, and I therefore find his realisable share in the equity in that business to be worth GBP 50,000. Since I am satisfied as to GBP 100,000 realisable sums, that figure exceeds the GBP 91,400 and under section 5 I find the amount to be recovered to be that figure.” In view of the difficulties inherent in realising the applicant’s share of the family business, the judge allowed him three years in which to pay the confiscation order, with a period of two years’ imprisonment to be served in default of payment.

On 28 January 1997 the applicant was refused leave to appeal against conviction and sentence (including the imposition of the confiscation order). His application to renew leave to appeal against conviction and sentence was refused on 22 January 1998 after a full hearing before the Court of Appeal.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e1
001-59558_a7_em1
CODE
DIRECT
41087/98
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e2
001-59558_a7_em2
ORG
NO_MASK
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e3
001-59558_a7_em3
ORG
NO_MASK
United Kingdom
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e4
001-59558_a7_em4
PERSON
DIRECT
Mr Steven Phillips
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e5
001-59558_a7_em5
DATETIME
QUASI
20 April 1998
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e6
001-59558_a7_em6
PERSON
QUASI
Mr R. James
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e7
001-59558_a7_em7
LOC
QUASI
Newport, Gwent
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e8
001-59558_a7_em8
PERSON
QUASI
Mr R. Pearse Wheatley
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e9
001-59558_a7_em9
LOC
QUASI
London
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e10
001-59558_a7_em10
ORG
NO_MASK
United Kingdom Government
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e11
001-59558_a7_em11
PERSON
QUASI
Ms H. Fieldsend
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e12
001-59558_a7_em12
ORG
NO_MASK
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e13
001-59558_a7_em13
DATETIME
QUASI
30 November 2000
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e14
001-59558_a7_em14
LOC
NO_MASK
Human Rights Building, Strasbourg
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e15
001-59558_a7_em15
DATETIME
QUASI
8 February 2001
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-59558_a7_e11
001-59558_a7_em16
PERSON
QUASI
Ms H. Fieldsend
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e12
001-59558_a7_em17
ORG
NO_MASK
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e16
001-59558_a7_em18
PERSON
QUASI
Mr D. Perry
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e17
001-59558_a7_em19
PERSON
QUASI
Ms M. Dyson
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e18
001-59558_a7_em20
ORG
NO_MASK
Home Office
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e19
001-59558_a7_em21
PERSON
QUASI
Mr P. Vallance
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e18
001-59558_a7_em22
ORG
NO_MASK
Home Office
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e8
001-59558_a7_em23
PERSON
QUASI
Mr R. Pearse Wheatley
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e20
001-59558_a7_em24
PERSON
QUASI
Mr Y. Chandarana
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e6
001-59558_a7_em25
PERSON
QUASI
Mr R. James
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e8
001-59558_a7_em26
PERSON
QUASI
001-59558_a7_em23 001-59558_a7_em8
Mr Pearse Wheatley
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e16
001-59558_a7_em27
PERSON
QUASI
001-59558_a7_em18
Mr Perry
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e21
001-59558_a7_em28
DATETIME
QUASI
27 June 1996
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e22
001-59558_a7_em29
ORG
QUASI
Newport Crown Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e23
001-59558_a7_em30
DATETIME
QUASI
November 1995
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e24
001-59558_a7_em31
QUANTITY
NO_MASK
large quantity of cannabis resin
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e25
001-59558_a7_em32
DATETIME
QUASI
12 July 1996
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e26
001-59558_a7_em33
DATETIME
QUASI
nine years
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e27
001-59558_a7_em34
DATETIME
QUASI
15 May 1996
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e28
001-59558_a7_em35
ORG
NO_MASK
Customs and Excise
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e29
001-59558_a7_em36
DEM
NO_MASK
drug financial investigation officer
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e29
001-59558_a7_em37
DEM
NO_MASK
001-59558_a7_em36
investigation officer
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e29
001-59558_a7_em38
DEM
NO_MASK
investigation officer
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e30
001-59558_a7_em39
MISC
QUASI
house converted into four flats
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e31
001-59558_a7_em40
ORG
QUASI
bed-and-breakfast business
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e32
001-59558_a7_em41
DATETIME
QUASI
December 1991
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e33
001-59558_a7_em42
MISC
NO_MASK
building society account
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e34
001-59558_a7_em43
DATETIME
QUASI
August 1994 to November 1995
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e35
001-59558_a7_em44
QUANTITY
QUASI
17,000 pounds sterling (GBP)
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e29
001-59558_a7_em45
DEM
NO_MASK
investigation officer
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e30
001-59558_a7_em46
MISC
QUASI
001-59558_a7_em39
four flats
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e36
001-59558_a7_em47
DEM
NO_MASK
director
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e37
001-59558_a7_em48
ORG
QUASI
newsagents business
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e38
001-59558_a7_em49
DATETIME
QUASI
July 1992
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e39
001-59558_a7_em50
PERSON
QUASI
his parents
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e40
001-59558_a7_em51
DATETIME
QUASI
September 1992
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e41
001-59558_a7_em52
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 28,493.25
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e42
001-59558_a7_em53
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 12,200
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e43
001-59558_a7_em54
QUANTITY
QUASI
five cars
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e44
001-59558_a7_em55
QUANTITY
NO_MASK
approximately GBP 15,000
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e45
001-59558_a7_em56
QUANTITY
NO_MASK
GBP 2,000
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e46
001-59558_a7_em57
MISC
QUASI
BMW 520i
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e47
001-59558_a7_em58
DATETIME
QUASI
October 1995
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e48
001-59558_a7_em59
QUANTITY
QUASI
approximately GBP 88,400
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e23
001-59558_a7_em60
DATETIME
QUASI
November 1995
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e49
001-59558_a7_em61
MISC
NO_MASK
cannabis
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e29
001-59558_a7_em62
DEM
NO_MASK
investigation officer
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e50
001-59558_a7_em63
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 117,838.27
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e29
001-59558_a7_em64
DEM
NO_MASK
investigation officer
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-59558_a7_e4
001-59558_a7_em65
PERSON
DIRECT
001-59558_a7_em4
Phillips
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e46
001-59558_a7_em66
MISC
QUASI
BMW 520i
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e51
001-59558_a7_em67
DATETIME
QUASI
1990-91
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e52
001-59558_a7_em68
MISC
QUASI
car theft
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e53
001-59558_a7_em69
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 25,000
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e54
001-59558_a7_em70
ORG
NO_MASK
insurance company
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e55
001-59558_a7_em71
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 50,000
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e56
001-59558_a7_em72
PERSON
NO_MASK
X
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e57
001-59558_a7_em73
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 12,000
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e58
001-59558_a7_em74
LOC
QUASI
newsagents premises
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e39
001-59558_a7_em75
PERSON
QUASI
his parents
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e37
001-59558_a7_em76
ORG
QUASI
001-59558_a7_em48
newsagents business
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e59
001-59558_a7_em77
DATETIME
QUASI
April 1994
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e60
001-59558_a7_em78
DEM
NO_MASK
trading in telephones
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e61
001-59558_a7_em79
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 17,000
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e33
001-59558_a7_em80
MISC
NO_MASK
building society account
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e62
001-59558_a7_em81
QUANTITY
NO_MASK
GBP 200
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e33
001-59558_a7_em82
MISC
NO_MASK
building society account
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e29
001-59558_a7_em83
DEM
NO_MASK
investigation officer
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e56
001-59558_a7_em84
PERSON
NO_MASK
X
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e22
001-59558_a7_em85
ORG
NO_MASK
001-59558_a7_em29
Crown Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e63
001-59558_a7_em86
DATETIME
QUASI
24 December 1996
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e22
001-59558_a7_em87
ORG
NO_MASK
001-59558_a7_em85
Crown
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e64
001-59558_a7_em88
DATETIME
QUASI
18 November 1989
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e65
001-59558_a7_em89
DATETIME
QUASI
1989
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e56
001-59558_a7_em90
PERSON
NO_MASK
X
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e56
001-59558_a7_em91
PERSON
NO_MASK
X
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e55
001-59558_a7_em92
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 50,000
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e56
001-59558_a7_em93
PERSON
NO_MASK
X
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-59558_a7_e66
001-59558_a7_em94
LOC
NO_MASK
Jamaica
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e49
001-59558_a7_em95
MISC
NO_MASK
cannabis
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e56
001-59558_a7_em96
PERSON
NO_MASK
X
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e4
001-59558_a7_em97
PERSON
DIRECT
001-59558_a7_em4
Mr Phillips
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e67
001-59558_a7_em98
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 28,000
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e56
001-59558_a7_em99
PERSON
NO_MASK
X
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e56
001-59558_a7_em100
PERSON
NO_MASK
X
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e37
001-59558_a7_em101
ORG
QUASI
family business
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e55
001-59558_a7_em102
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 50,000
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e56
001-59558_a7_em103
PERSON
NO_MASK
X
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e37
001-59558_a7_em104
ORG
QUASI
001-59558_a7_em48
family business
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e55
001-59558_a7_em105
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 50,000
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e56
001-59558_a7_em106
PERSON
NO_MASK
X
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e67
001-59558_a7_em107
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 28,000
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e68
001-59558_a7_em108
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 11,400
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e69
001-59558_a7_em109
DEM
NO_MASK
general wheeler-dealer
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e68
001-59558_a7_em110
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 11,400
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e70
001-59558_a7_em111
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 91,400
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e55
001-59558_a7_em112
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 50,000
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e71
001-59558_a7_em113
DATETIME
QUASI
1992
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e55
001-59558_a7_em114
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 50,000
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e72
001-59558_a7_em115
QUANTITY
NO_MASK
one-third interest
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e39
001-59558_a7_em116
PERSON
QUASI
his parents
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e37
001-59558_a7_em117
ORG
QUASI
newsagents business
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e73
001-59558_a7_em118
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 150,000
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e74
001-59558_a7_em119
DATETIME
QUASI
1993
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e55
001-59558_a7_em120
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 50,000
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e55
001-59558_a7_em121
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 50,000
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e75
001-59558_a7_em122
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 100,000
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e70
001-59558_a7_em123
QUANTITY
QUASI
GBP 91,400
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e37
001-59558_a7_em124
ORG
QUASI
family business
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e76
001-59558_a7_em125
DATETIME
QUASI
three years
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e77
001-59558_a7_em126
DATETIME
QUASI
two years
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e78
001-59558_a7_em127
DATETIME
QUASI
28 January 1997
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-59558_a7_e79
001-59558_a7_em128
DATETIME
QUASI
22 January 1998
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-59558_a7_e80
001-59558_a7_em129
ORG
NO_MASK
Court of Appeal
Steven Phillips
GBR
CHAMBER
Task: Annotate the document to anonymise the following person: Steven Phillips