|
The case of Marco Pierre White's disappearing letter |
A recent Court of Appeal case involving celebrity chef Marco Pierre White has helped to clarify what use can and can't be made of 'evidence' that comes into your possession by mistake in a divorce case. Elisabeth Sneade, a solicitor in the KCJ family team, explains.
As solicitors, we often ask our clients to provide copy documents. The documents are usually financial, such as bank statements, but could equally relate to, say, a child's schooling if this was relevant to the issues being resolved.
But what do you do if your former spouse has left documents behind which you know have not been disclosed to you or their solicitor? Can you disclose them? What if post arrives for your former spouse and they have already moved out of your shared home? Can you open the letters? Marco Pierre White, celebrity chef, recently won a battle on this issue at the Court of Appeal.
Opening someone else's post to intercept documents is not permitted. So, if you open your former spouse's bank statement and it shows that they have money that has not been disclosed what can you do? In Marco Pierre White's case the Court of Appeal confirmed that marital status does not excuse the 'impermissible act'. Documents left lying around can be copied and given to your solicitor but cannot be taken. The receipt and retention of such documents by solicitors does not amount to misuse of information but it is clearly inappropriate for solicitors to encourage their clients to break the law.
In other words, if you as a client take copies of an original document that your former spouse has left lying around the house we can use the detail. We would then ask your former spouse why the information you have found has not so far been forthcoming. You may not retain the original document and it must be handed to your former spouse as soon as possible.
In Marco Pierre White's case his wife's solicitors had retained a letter sent to him by his daughter. The letter had been intercepted by his wife and retained by her solicitors. The Court of Appeal ruled that the retention of the letter for more than 18 months was not acceptable.
So the basic rule of thumb is copy it rather than keep it.
|
|
