Jacqueline Hall specialises in the fields of fraud, drug offences, money-laundering, serious crime and health and safety law. Since her appointment in 2002 to the B List of the Attorney General’s Panel of Prosecuting Advocates, she has prosecuted on behalf of the government major frauds, MTIC cases, substantial drug importations, tax evasion, money-laundering, corruption, asset forfeiture, restraint and serious regulatory matters. She has particular expertise in cases where issues of public interest immunity are engaged. Whilst much of her work in recent years has been for the prosecution authorities, she also defends.
She is regularly instructed by Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office, the Department of Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, and the Health and Safety Executive. She has also been instructed by the Serious Fraud Office and the Department of Work and Pensions. She is a grade 3 CPS Prosecutor.
Prosecution Work:
HM Revenue and Customs
- Operation Scurry [2008] – case involving a large VAT repayment fraud, committed by the fabrication of invoices, doubling up of input tax claims, re-invoicing for services through different companies, and fraudulent representation of corresponding output tax claims.
- Operation Semi 2 [2008]– a money-laundering case arising out of a VAT MTIC fraud. The case involves the laundering of the proceeds of the fraud through the UK, Dubai, Cyprus and other accounts back into the UK. The case required obtaining evidence from foreign jurisdictions via Letters of Request.
- Operation Hangdog [2007]– this was a complex MTIC carousel fraud involving a VAT loss of £5 million. The chains of transactions were complicated as money from the fraud was siphoned off-shore. The considerable size of the papers necessitated a six-month disclosure exercise which I conducted alone. The successful conviction has led to advising in the forthcoming confiscation hearing.
- Operation Casa [2007] – a SOCA importation of 200 kilos of cocaine through private airfields. The case had a complex sensitive background involving a number of PII hearings.
- Operation Semi [2006] – a complex MTIC fraud involving a £3.7 million cheat on the Revenue. Nine defendants in total were charged. The trial lasted five months. Successful confiscation proceedings (having restrained assets before charge) followed trial.
- Operation Talisker [2006] – this prosecution involved two defendants being tried for their involvement in a 100 kilo cocaine importation from South America disguised as tins of tuna. The case resulted in a successful conviction and confiscation hearing.
- Operation Crux [2006] – a multi-handed diversion fraud. The case involved corruption as one of the defendants was a serving Customs Officer. There was a complicated sensitive background necessitating a careful approach to disclosure, and requiring a number of PII hearings.
- Operation Televise [2005]– a large nine-handed MTIC fraud involving the loss of £9 million from the Public Revenue.
- Operation Duffle [2005] – a four-handed SOCA heroin importation all resulting in successful convictions.
- Operation Cocoa [2004] – a multi-handed VAT repayment fraud. This case also involved an element of corruption as one of the defendants was a Customs Officer who played a vital role in the fraud. The case resulted in successful convictions.
Department of Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform
- Jacqueline Hall has prosecuted for BERR (formerly DTI) for the last 6 years. She has conducted many cases involving offences under both the Insolvency Act 1986 and Companies Act 1985. She has also conducted relevant confiscation hearings following conviction.
Serious Fraud Office
- She was instructed over a period of 16 months in the preparation of the trial involving the Versailles Group, a substantial FTSE-250 company. Her involvement included a comprehensive disclosure exercise, identifying material to be made subject to public interest immunity and legal professional privilege. She advised and participated in respect of the restraint hearing and advised in anticipated confiscation proceedings.
Health and Safety Executive
She has prosecuted a number of companies involving the deaths or serious injury of employees in the workplace:
- R v Space 4 Ltd [2007]; an employee was trapped in a foam-injecting press, used to make pre-fabricated houses. The machine crushed him to death;
- R v William Verry (Facilities Management) Ltd [2007]; injury caused where wooden boards used in the refurbishment of a building were incorrectly lifted. One of the boards fell and hit a worker below, causing his death;
- R v Euros (London)Ltd, Gargreen Ltd and Vijay Kara [2007]; prosecution of the director and his two companies involved in the construction of a steel-framed warehouse. A two-ton concrete slab fell on a worker during the construction, leaving him permanently disabled;
- R v Midco Ltd and ETD Ltd; an employee was crushed to death when the loader he was operating overturned and fell on him.
Defence Work:
- R v Dunn and others [2008] – Leading counsel in a money-laundering case relating to a conspiracy to supply cocaine, which led to a successful acquittal.
- R v Egan and others – Successfully defended in an substantial multi-handed Inland Revenue prosecution involving the fraudulent reclaim of tax rebates;
Other Reported Cases
- R v Saracoglu [2003] EWCA 2244 (31.07.03 [2003] EWCA Crim 2244 2003 WL 22002394): Court: Court of Appeal - Criminal Division:
The appeal arose from the fact that the same firm of solicitors had acted for two defendants, who had run cut-throat defences. One of the convicted defendants appealed on the grounds that there had been a conflict of interest that had rendered his trial unfair. The Court of Appeal held that, on the facts, there was no conflict of interest which had tainted the conduct of the appellant’s defence. The relevant question was whether there had been any actual unfairness. In this case each defendant had been represented by separate counsel and all the material advice and decisions had been taken by the appellant’s counsel who was not tainted by or influenced by the interests of the co accused.
- R v Quayle, Wales and others [2005] EWCA 1415 (27.05.05 [2005] EWCA 1415) Court: Court of Appeal - Criminal Division.
The Court of Appeal rejected the argument that unlawful conduct, specifically the cultivation, production, importation and possession of cannabis could be justified on the grounds of use for pain relief. The defences of duress or necessity should be confined to cases where an accused committed what would otherwise be an unlawful act to avoid imminent danger of physical injury.
Called to the Bar 1994, Lincoln's Inn
Training: Advocacy assessor to RCPO
