DISCLOSURE OF PRIVATE DOCUMENTS IN DIVORCE

Last week, the Court of Appeal ruled that the chef Marco Pierre White can seek damages by beginning a legal action against the law firm which acted for this third wife Mati during their divorce. 

During the month leading up to their separation in 2007, Mati had intercepted personal documents belonging to White which were used as part of her case.  White said that he had not seen these documents before they were produced to the Court and Mati had said in the course of the proceedings that Withers told her that she could go through his post.  In 2008, when White first tried to sue Withers for damages, Mr. Justice Eady struck out the case.  But on appeal he was given leave to proceed.  He is now bringing a renewed action for interference with goods conversion and trespass to chattels.  In the 1992 case of Hildebrand –v- Hildebrand, it established the principle that if documents were left open or lying around that it was acceptable to use them as long as they were copied and the originals were returned.  However, it was not acceptable to break into someone's study or their filing cabinet. 

Both data protection laws and concerns over privacy have played a part in narrowing the evidence that can be presented as part of a divorce.

25 January 2010

Disclaimer

The contents of this article are for the purposes of general awareness only.  They do not purport to constitute legal or professional advice.  The law may have changed since this article was published.  Readers should not act on the basis of the information included and should take appropriate professional advice upon their own particular circumstances.