Battling couples could be banned from turning private eye in
bitter divorce cases if a landmark ruling bans snooping through
your partner's papers.
Former Michelin-starred chef Marco Pierre White has taken his
estranged wife's lawyers to court in a case that could have a major
impact on how future divorce battles are fought, according to
Gurdip Kaur-Brring, a partner in the family law division of MFG
Solicitors.
Mr White is claiming that his estranged wife wrongfully
intercepted his personal papers and if the case is upheld, it could
end the long established practice of spouses turning detective to
unearth evidence helpful to them in divorce cases.
Miss Kaur-Brring said: "There is a legal duty on both parties to
make full and candid disclosure of all relevant documents
voluntarily and where one party suspects that the other has been
less than forthcoming then the secret rummaging of papers to find
evidence is condoned by Courts, provided that the spouse has not
embarked on a commando-style raid and broken into the ex-spouse's
house to obtain such information."
She cited the case of Hilderbrand v Hilderbrand which
established the Hilderbrand rule which basically states that any
paperwork "left lying around" can be copied and used in the
proceedings. The originals must be returned to the rightful owner
forthwith. It is not right to take and keep an original document
especially which involves concealing the document from the intended
recipient.
Central to Marco Pierre White's argument is his claim that
documents his wife had intercepted included a contract from P&O
and a personal letter from his daughter by a previous marriage
which he had never seen until the originals were produced by his
wife's lawyers.
Gurdip Kaur-Brring said: "All too often the relationship of
trust between divorcing couples is no longer there and spouses
result to DIY or self help methods to obtain information which they
believe the other party may withhold, remove or destroy and which
could potentially prejudice that spouses claim for financial
relief.
"In a recent matter involving the removal by the wife of the
husband's computer hard drive the Judge commented that even if the
wife had accessed the computer hard disk without the husband's
consent he did not think that a Judge in the family division could
exclude it.
"The Judge did not say that evidence obtained from a self help
measure could never be justified nor that evidence obtained from a
self help measure would automatically be excluded but rather that
the Court is the appropriate body to deal with such behaviour
rather than the parties taking it upon themselves.
"Marco Pierre White made a claim for damages against his wife's
solicitors arguing that on the advice of her lawyers she
intercepted his mail and documents and withheld the same, which
included a letter from his daughter from his first marriage. A
letter that was described by the Judge as a 'touching almost heart
breaking letter to her father'.
In a landmark ruling the judge decided that there was a case to
answer and that the lawyers should be held to account.
"It is professional impropriety to advise a client to behave
improperly and if Marco Pierre White should succeed in his claim
against the wife's solicitors then this could mark the end of the
self help measures where spouses have turned detective to unearth
evidence," said Gurdip Kaur-Brring.
She added that family lawyers would be looking for clear
guidance from the outcome of this case so that they could advise
clients on precisely what they could and could not do in the
future.