header-logo header-logo

03 February 2012
Issue: 7499 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Sensitive evidence

Use of secret evidence in civil cases could render some claims untriable

The use of secret evidence in civil cases could render some claims untriable, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, David Anderson QC, has said.

Giving evidence to the Joint Committee on Human Rights on the Justice and Security Green Paper last week, Anderson spoke about the impact on civil justice of closed material procedure (CMP), under which sensitive evidence can be excluded. The Green Paper proposes introducing legislation to make CMPs more widely available in civil proceedings.

Where highly sensitive material is so central to a case that it is untriable without that evidence, the claim is either struck out or the parties are forced to settle. Neither of these outcomes is desirable, Anderson said. For example, in Al Rawi v Security Service [2011] UKSC 34, in which former Guantanamo detainees sought compensation, the government settled the case after being refused permission to keep evidence secret.

Anderson recommended that strict conditions be applied where CMP is allowed, and that it must be the court not the government that makes the decision in order to maintain impartiality.

The Committee is hearing evidence from a range of other experts, including Dinah Rose QC, Lord Carlile and Angus McCullough QC.

Issue: 7499 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll