Are covert recordings admissable?
Most people carry smartphones with high-quality recording functions, leading to the increased likelihood that such devices are being used by employees to covertly record meetings in the workplace.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in the recent case of Vaughan v London Borough of Lewisham has reaffirmed that, while distasteful, covert recordings are admissible as evidence in an employment tribunal and the way in which they are made does not alter that.
The employee, Ms Vaughan, applied for permission to use 39 hours’ worth of covert recordings that she had made of various meetings between herself and her managers or colleagues. Ms Vaughan argued that the recordings would show that the official notes made by her employers were inaccurate or wrong and that the council had lied in various tribunal documents…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Stephenson Harwood briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
News from Stephenson Harwood
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Stephenson Harwood
This helpful one-page summary diagram shows the current expected timetable for Great Britain’s passenger rail franchises and concessions.
In Kays Hotels v Barclays Bank, the Commercial Court refused a strike-out application that was based on a bank’s argument that the claim was time-barred.
Analysis from The Lawyer
‘Exotic’ investors and opportunities for legal work beyond M&A feature in The Lawyer’s high-level roundtable debate on south-east Europe