header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
26 February 2020 / Beth Bell
Issue: 7876 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Under surveillance—who’s watching & why?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
16645
Beth Bell considers the lawfulness & usefulness of covert recordings in family cases
  • The lawfulness of the recording: can a recording be relied on in court?
  • Will the evidence advance the client’s case?

The issue of obtaining information in a clandestine fashion is not a new one for family law practitioners. It has long been the practice of those experiencing the fall-out from relationship breakdown to access confidential information belonging to their ex, typically in relation to their financial affairs. In this context the law in relation to the historic practices that grew up around the so-called Hildebrand rules have been clarified, most notably in Tchenguiz and others v Imerman [2010] EWCA Civ 908, [2011] 1 All ER 555. A more recent feature of family disputes, and an issue which judges and practitioners are having to grapple with on an increasingly frequent basis, is information obtained by way of covert recording.

This issue is not unique to the family law arena and is being encountered by judges in a variety

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

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll