Attorney-General's Reference No 28 of 2014
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
- LORD JUSTICE TREACY
- MRS JUSTICE SIMLER DBE
- HIS HONOUR JUDGE BEVAN QC
Areas of Law
- Criminal Law and Procedure
- Employment Law
- Immigration Law
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case involved an offender who operated a business using illegal immigrants as security guards and utilized false documentation to circumvent immigration controls. The offender was originally sentenced to four-and-a-half years' imprisonment and six years' disqualification from being a company director. The Solicitor General referred the case under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, arguing the sentence was unduly lenient. Upon review, the court agreed and increased the sentence to eight years, citing various aggravating factors including prolonged offending, substantial financial gain, and the exploitation of vulnerable workers.
J U D G M E N T
1. LORD JUSTICE TREACY:
2. This is a Reference pursuant to section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 brought on behalf of the Solicitor General.
3. The offender was sentenced on 14th March 2014 at Woolwich Crown Court following a three month trial. The total sentence imposed was four-and-a-half years' imprisonment. That was made up as follows. Count 1, conspiracy to facilitate a breach of immigration law, that is a breach of immigration control relating to non EU citizens, four-and-a-half years. The conspiracy spanned a period between April 2007 and October 2012. Count 2, using unlicensed security operatives, contrary to section 5 of the Private Security Act 2001, two years' imprisonment concurrent. In addition the offender was disqualified from being a director of any business for six years.
4. In broadest outline this offender set up and ran businesses providing security guards to construction sites. Many of the guards were foreign nationals who either had no right to be in this country or were not entitled to work whilst they were here. Those guards were not in any position to dispute excessively long hours which they were required to work or the paltry wages which they were paid. Once this offender was at risk of exposure towards the end of the scheme, he created false documentation designed to deceive anyone who might question the entitlement of his employees to work in this country.
5. Dealing with the matters in more detail, the offender ran two businesses, (Blue Feathers), the first of which was incorporated in April 2007. Those businesses provided security guards to the construction industry. He was assisted by people related to him and others, some of whom were prosecuted alongside him. An example of client companies is Castleoak. It was a requirement that all security staff should be employed by an approved contractor as defined within the Security Industry Approved Contractor Scheme and must carry a valid SIA licence. This company was assured that all Blue Feathers guards had SIA and CSCS (Construction Skills Certificate Scheme) cards. They were told that the employees were being paid at rates considerably in excess of the national minimum rate. Consequently Castleoak had no concerns about the rates quoted or about the employees. Employees were provided over a two year period.
6. A particular concern arose at one site where a guard was arrested and found to have false documentation. He had been provided with an SIA