Offshore Litigation

Blog

Offshore Litigation

Contributors

Jonathan Addo
Jonathan Addo
  • Jonathan Addo

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Ian Mann
Ian Mann
  • Ian Mann

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Nick Hoffman
Nick Hoffman
  • Nick Hoffman

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Vicky Lord
Vicky Lord
  • Vicky Lord

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Chai Ridgers
Chai Ridgers
  • Chai Ridgers

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
William Peake
William Peake
  • William Peake

  • Partner
  • London
Peter Ferrer
Peter Ferrer
  • Peter Ferrer

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Jeremy Child
Jeremy Child
  • Jeremy Child

  • Partner
  • London
Claire Goldstein
Claire Goldstein
  • Claire Goldstein

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Jayson Wood
Jayson Wood
  • Jayson Wood

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Phillip Kite
Phillip Kite
  • Phillip Kite

  • Partner
  • London
Stuart Cullen
Stuart Cullen
  • Stuart Cullen

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Lorinda Peasland
Lorinda Peasland
  • Lorinda Peasland

  • Consultant
  • Hong Kong
Paul Madden
Paul Madden
  • Paul Madden

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Jessica Williams
Jessica Williams
  • Jessica Williams

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Paula Kay
Paula Kay
  • Paula Kay

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Andrew Thorp
Andrew Thorp
  • Andrew Thorp

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Henry Mander
Henry Mander
  • Henry Mander

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Andrew Johnstone
Andrew Johnstone
  • Andrew Johnstone

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Nicola Roberts
Nicola Roberts
  • Nicola Roberts

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Julie Engwirda
Julie Engwirda
  • Julie Engwirda

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Paul Smith
Paul Smith
  • Paul Smith

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands

Covert recordings a fact of professional life

In the recent decision of Mustard v Flower et al, the English High Court confirmed that there is no hard rule that evidence obtained unlawfully or improperly must be excluded; rather, the question will turn on the relevance and probative value of the evidence and the effect that admitting or not admitting it would have on the overall fairness of the litigation.

The ongoing case concerns a road traffic accident in which the claimant alleges to have suffered serious brain damage. The defendants accept liability, however contest the severity of the brain damage. It was agreed the claimant would be examined by a number of medical experts for each side. In doing so, the claimant secretly recorded the examinations by the defendants’ experts but did not make any recordings of her own experts. The claimant then relied on the recordings to file supplemental expert reports discrediting the evaluation conducted by the defendants’ neuropsychology expert.

The defendants accepted that the mere fact the recordings had been obtained unlawfully, or at least improperly, did not render them inadmissible in and of itself, however argued that fairness warranted the exclusion of the evidence due to: the nature in which the recordings were obtained; the fact they impaired the evaluation, as subsequent evaluations were no longer possible; and, that they gave rise to an uneven playing field as the claimant’s experts had not been recorded.

The Court ultimately rejected the defendants’ arguments and admitted the evidence on the basis that it was both probative and highly relevant to the central issue as to the reliance to be placed on the defendants’ expert report. Furthermore, once it was known that the conduct of the evaluation was in question, it would be highly artificial (on both sides) to proceed as if it was not a live issue.

Although the Court considered the covert nature of the recordings reprehensible, it took the view that they were not unlawful, and in fact accepted that “covert recording has become a fact of professional life”. The fact the recordings impaired the evaluation was only a marginal consideration in regard to admissibility; and, as the defendant did not raise any query regarding the claimant’s expert report that could be resolved by a recording, the level playing field point was merely theoretical.

Taking all factors into consideration, the Court considered the balance clearly favoured admitting the evidence.

Covert recordings a fact of professional life

Leave A Comment