header-logo header-logo

Use it or lose it?

11 March 2010 / Jonathan Cohen
Issue: 7408 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Jonathan Cohen considers the risks of using improperly obtained evidence

Bitterly contested divorce proceedings would not as a matter of course attract the attention of commercial litigation practitioners. But a vexed and long running set of divorce proceedings has raised a question which has exercised judges in both the Family and the Queen’s Bench Divisions of the High Court, and has brought into stark relief an issue with important ramifications for all litigators: how will the civil courts respond to a party’s attempts to prove its case using evidence which it ought not to have?

The question whether to use or to exclude evidence has also been considered by the Court of Appeal in a slightly different context; whether a party can rely on evidence of without prejudice discussions where there is a dispute about the interpretation of a written settlement agreement.

Vivan Imerman

The cases were Vivan Imerman v (1) Robert Tchenguiz (2) Vincent Tchenguiz (3) Tim McLean (4) Nouri Obadya (5) Sairosh Zaiwalla [2009] EWHC 2024 (QB); I v

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll