header-logo header-logo

30 June 2023 / Mary Young
Issue: 8031 / Categories: Features , Disclosure , Fraud , In Court
printer mail-detail

Silence is golden

128483
Holding your tongue? Mary Young considers when a party’s right to silence applies in civil proceedings
  • How and when the privilege against self-incrimination (the right to silence) applies in civil proceedings.

In English criminal law, a suspect has a long-recognised right to remain silent. The police caution specifically reminds a suspect that they do not have to say anything, but that it might harm their defence if they do not mention something which they later rely on in court.

In civil claims with criminal or quasi-criminal implications, the right to remain silent can also apply: a defendant has the right not to give evidence, and is also entitled to assert the privilege against self-incrimination to avoid circumstances in which they are compelled to contribute to their own prosecution.

The principle of the privilege against self-incrimination originated from the common law, later codified in s 14 of the Civil Evidence Act 1968. This sets out that in proceedings other than criminal proceedings, a person has the right to refuse to answer

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll