"Private and Confidential" document usage in court

APlusK

I would like to know if there are any legal consequences of using a document marked "Private and Confidential" in Court.
The document is written by a London City Council (UK document), does not have any name in the heading (ex: for M. X), the court is French. The defender is in Switzerland. It contains highly personal information.

234

APlusK wrote: »

I would like to know if there are any legal consequences of using a document marked "Private and Confidential" in Court.
The document is written by a London City Council (UK document), does not have any name in the heading (ex: for M. X), the court is French. The defender is in Switzerland. It contains highly personal information.

Since this is an actual case you need proper legal advice. Particularly because this would most likely be dealt with as a matter of French law (though it may not depending on a lot of conflicts questions).

Generally speaking it is "without prejudice" documents that cannot be used in court. But the issue is one of substance rather than form so you cannot rule out "private and confidential" documents within some class of privilege; which you definitely need a proper lawyer to advise on.

NoQuarter

If in doubt, claim privilege. Then have the fight about it later.

APlusK

Not sure if I should post on the same thread.

I have received further documents, from the guy, and there is a second document (not marked in any way, neither private, nor confidential or without prejudice), where it is specified:
"The contents must not be disclosed to any person without the consent of the Head of Y, City of X".
The concent has not been given.
This is a document addressed to me (it has my name and my address) few years ago, which I have never seen and has most probably been stolen.

I have asked a loyer in England, about this specific one, and she said that it is a French issue. The loyer in France said that it is an English one, as the confidentiality has been broken according to the rules of UK: the document was emitted there. I am really stuck.

There are equally professional e-mails, sent by an empoyer of the Council, and NHS documents sent by NHS to the Council of the City.

It is a child custody process and I have read the conditions to post on the site (no real case) but this is so messy that it looks better than a fictional one (I can't even get a professional opinion).

hullaballoo

No, you should not.

Are you Irish or currently living in Ireland?

APlusK

I am British and I am living in Switzerland.

hullaballoo

APlusK wrote: »

I am British and I am living in Switzerland.

Ok, the inevitable follow-up question is why you think an Irish website will be able to help you, a British citizen, living in Switzerland, dealing with a conflict of laws issue that seems to be between French and English law?

I'm not being facetious but an Irish lawyer isn't going to be able to advise you (even if legal advice was permitted here).

It does seem that at least one of your advisers so far has been incorrect in their advice, though. That is as far as I can put it.

APlusK

To me it seemed a question of "common sense", and there are z-llions of laws overally valid of Human Rights, for example. But you seem to suggest that the issue depends on a local law. Thanks hullaballoo.

If even the Irish go-through can't help, I doubt anyone can.

hullaballoo

APlusK wrote: »

To me it seemed a question of "common sense", and there are z-llions of laws overally valid of Human Rights, for example. But you seem to suggest that the issue depends on a local law.

Actually, it's not even as simple as local law. It's an area known as conflict of laws or choice of laws. There are some cross-border principles, some of which may be governed by EU law (although, with the Swiss element, I am unsure of the extent to which EU law will have effect). It is an area of International law that gives rise to confusion everywhere. Probably the most difficult aspects is that once you have found out which State's laws apply, that may not be the venue for the hearing of the case. In your example, the governing law might be England and Wales but the venue is France. In that case, you effectively have to run a case according to French procedure but applying English law.

It's a bloody (without abusing the word) mess.

Thanks hullaballoo.

You're welcome. And thank you for spelling my name correctly.

If even the Irish go-through can't help, I doubt anyone can.

What do you mean by "an Irish go-through"? Is there an Irish element to this matter as well, or do you simply mean that you think an Irish lawyer is in as good a position as any to work this out for you?

It may be the case that if an Irish lawyer had sight of the proceedings and relevant documents that they could form an opinion as to where the case should be and what laws should apply but there will be issues with that too. Aside from anything else, it seems that you do not have direct access to an Irish legal professional. That being the case, you should consult with the nearest best expert to you in Switzerland. I don't know much about Swiss lawyers but there has to be at least a few who know about this stuff.

APlusK

I'll try with Switzerland. (Even the French lawyer has put me in red, without solving completly anything in the custody process: same result if I was defending myself or not at all).
If you say that there is a bloody mess about the right to complain about the used proofs, you should see the custody process itself, non speaking of proofs ...

By "Irish go-through" I meant a sort of native instinct of going through ... say, life in general, to not get more specific.

At least the Swiss are correct, while the French ... I can't have a black enough word to use at the French authorities address and I am really sorry to say it, if it happens you to be French, but I'll not take it back. It's just bitter experince and completly nothing rassist in it.

hullaballoo

Where are you originally from?

APlusK

North-East.

hullaballoo

Ok, it's just that your sentence structure and word usage is not what I'd associate with a native English speaker.

APlusK

hullaballoo wrote: »

Ok, it's just that your sentence structure and word usage is not what I'd associate with a native English speaker.

Thanks. I'm glad of speaking English at all. I speak five languages and none of them well.

Carawaystick

I'd say that emails by definition are not private, unless they are encrypted. The protocols for email copy the email from computer to computer from sender to receiver. Any administrator of those intermediate computers could read the mail, (along with security organisations)

It is like sending a postcard

234

Carawaystick wrote: »

I'd say that emails by definition are not private, unless they are encrypted. The protocols for email copy the email from computer to computer from sender to receiver. Any administrator of those intermediate computers could read the mail, (along with security organisations)

It is like sending a postcard

None of that precludes an email from being privileged. FYI, privilege rarely has anything to do with privacy except in a peripheral way.