header-logo header-logo

26 February 2020 / Beth Bell
Issue: 7876 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Under surveillance—who’s watching & why?

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

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