The principles of corporate attribution have always been a complex area of law, rife with uncertainty and controversy. The recent Supreme Court's decision in Crown Prosecution Service v Aquila Advisory Ltdis notable for clarifying the scope of the principle as articulated in its previous decision of Bilta (UK) Ltd v Nazir. This time, however, the Supreme Court was confronted with an issue that was hitherto unaddressed by previous courts: whether proprietary rights to which a principal would otherwise be entitled against his fiduciary could be asserted in the face of confiscation orders obtained by the Crown Prosecution Service against the fiduciary under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. This article argues that the reasoning and outcome in this significant decision are unsatisfactory.