header-logo header-logo

Damage control? (Pt 2)

10 January 2014 / David Burrows
Issue: 7589 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Confidentiality, privacy & disclosure: David Burrows examines the duty of disclosure under common law in the second of two articles

Part 1 of this series considered the confidentiality of information removed by one spouse from the other (after Imerman v Tchenguiz and ors [2010] EWCA Civ 908, [2011] 1 All ER 555); and whether the rules which restrict disclosure in financial remedy proceedings are intra vires the rule-makers. This article looks at when a duty of disclosure arises at common law; at circumstances where confidentiality can be overridden; and whether confidentiality or privacy and a duty to disclose are mutually compatible. And where does this leave the lawyer who is advising the client who has taken his/her spouse’s documents?

When does the duty of disclosure arise?

It is not clear on what date in law (as distinct from the date of filing Form E per Imerman at paras [33] and [44] and FPR 2010 r 9.14(1)) a party’s duty to disclose arises. In Livesey (formerly Jenkins) v Jenkins [1985] AC 424, [1985]

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Browne Jacobson—Matthew Kemp

Browne Jacobson—Matthew Kemp

Firm grows real estate team with tenth partner hire this financial year

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

NEWS
Neurotechnology is poised to transform contract law—and unsettle it. Writing in NLJ this week, Harry Lambert, barrister at Outer Temple Chambers and founder of the Centre for Neurotechnology & Law, and Dr Michelle Sharpe, barrister at the Victorian Bar, explore how brain–computer interfaces could both prove and undermine consent
Comparators remain the fault line of discrimination law. In this week's NLJ, Anjali Malik, partner at Bellevue Law, and Mukhtiar Singh, barrister at Doughty Street Chambers, review a bumper year of appellate guidance clarifying how tribunals should approach ‘actual’ and ‘evidential’ comparators. A new six-stage framework stresses a simple starting point: identify the treatment first
In cross-border divorces, domicile can decide everything. In NLJ this week, Jennifer Headon, legal director and head of international family, Isobel Inkley, solicitor, and Fiona Collins, trainee solicitor, all at Birketts LLP, unpack a Court of Appeal ruling that re-centres nuance in jurisdiction disputes. The court held that once a domicile of choice is established, the burden lies on the party asserting its loss
Early determination is no longer a novelty in arbitration. In NLJ this week, Gustavo Moser, arbitration specialist lawyer at Lexis+, charts the global embrace of summary disposal powers, now embedded in the Arbitration Act 1996 and mirrored worldwide. Tribunals may swiftly dismiss claims with ‘no real prospect of succeeding’, but only if fairness is preserved
The Ministry of Justice is once again in the dock as access to justice continues to deteriorate. NLJ consultant editor David Greene warns in this week's issue that neither public legal aid nor private litigation funding looks set for a revival in 2026
back-to-top-scroll