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 I, [2009] EWHC 3486 (Fam).

The proceedings in the Queen Bench

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll