header-logo header-logo

10 January 2008 / Susan Edwards
Issue: 7303 / Categories: Features , Legal services , Procedure & practice , Profession
printer mail-detail

A gap in the ring fence?

Does automatic disclosure mean no more refuge in self-incrimination privilege? Susan Edwards investigates

The Family Proceedings (Amendment No 4) Rules 2005 (SI 2005/1976) (FPR)—unlike the former Family Proceedings Rules 1991 (SI 1991/1247)— permit disclosure, to police and prosecutors investigating and initiating criminal proceedings, of documents, admissions and inculpatory statements made by parties in care proceedings. This includes the judge’s finding of fact in such proceedings without application to the court.

 

While it may be argued that these changes are merely procedural and have not fundamentally altered any principle of evidence or of justice, courts will now be presented with an increasing number of applications by prosecutors to admit in evidence information and admissions made in care proceedings into criminal proceedings. There is an urgent and pressing need for the jurisprudence on exclusionary discretion in the criminal courts to develop and provide some certainty.

 

SELF INCRIMINATION

In the course of a criminal investigation, and at trial, the suspect/defendant has the right to remain silent and to refuse to answer any question put to him. This

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll