Here's an interesting piece from Mondaq, which is representative of the reasons why I continue to value and enjoy their newsletter subscription service (and why you should too). The article, written by Benjamin McFarlane of B.J. McFarlane & Co., a London-based lawfirm, details the impact of a recent legal decision (Hughes v. Carratu) on evidence-gathering by investigators on behalf of attorneys in the UK.

Here's the nugget:

...The decision of the High Court this summer in the case of Hughes v Carratu is a warning to investigation agents, and the lawyers that instruct them, that they both need to be very careful about how information concerning defendants is sourced.

It is, of course, notoriously difficult as a litigator to obtain accurate financial information about any target, but this decision has highlighted the need for the use of strictly lawful means when obtaining that information.

The decision does not in fact set out any consequences if an investigation agent uses unlawful means to obtain information and it remains to be seen how far the Claimant, Mr Hughes, will take his action.

However, the Court while it merely envisaged that there may be remedies where personal and protected information has been unlawfully obtained, did decide that it is legitimate for a Claimant to have discovery of any documents which an investigation agent has obtained about him in circumstances where a part of that information has evidently been obtained illegally.

This disclosure may of itself prove embarrasing to those involved...

To say the least. If you want to join-up and get a look at the rest of the article, as well as sign up for a few of Mondaq's infinitely intersting newsletter lists, you can do so here.

-- MDT