header-logo header-logo

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

Use it or lose it?

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll