This is the judgment of the Court to which each member of the Court has contributed. As will be seen, this case is concerned, albeit on its own very particular facts, with the width of the jurisdiction to re-open final determinations of this Court. Further, the case illuminates the importance of the Crown getting disclosure right first time.
On the 23rd June, , this Court ruled that Gohil's application to re-open should be heard as an oral application and gave directions for the hearing. On the 20th October, , this Court directed that Preko's application should be heard together with Gohil's application and set a timetable for the hearing.
The procedural history can be relatively briefly summarised. On the 17th April, , Ibori was sentenced to a total of 13 years' imprisonment.
An appeal against sentence was dismissed. Ibori did not at the time appeal against his conviction. From , the firm acted for Ibori. It was the Crown's case inter alia that Gohil provided a client account for Ibori, through which Ibori laundered money. On the 8th April, , Gohil was sentenced to a total of 10 years' imprisonment, comprised of 3 years on Tureen and 7 years consecutive on Augen.
On the 17th June, , a different constitution of the full Court dismissed Gohil's renewed applications for leave to appeal his convictions on the Tureen and Augen indictments.
