All at sea!

One of the many MANY things they never teach you at Law School is how often you will have to deal with clients’ misconceptions about the law.

These range from how long things will take (no, it’s not a five minute job to draft a three page witness statement and no I can’t just phone up the Judge and ask him to tell the other side off) to how much things will cost (almost all solicitors charge for their time, so if you call me up three times in a day, to ask me the same question, it’s going to have a knock on effect on your invoice!)

Many misconceptions arise because people believe what they are told, such as what they read in the papers, or what they see on TV, or what their friends have told them.

I’m still telling people that there is no such thing as a common law spouse.  I don’t care how long you’ve lived together, that does not give you any kind of automatic spousal rights.

I’m still having to explain that simply because there is nothing in writing, doesn’t mean that there isn’t a contract.  A contract can come into existence on a hand shake, or a nod of the head.

And, perhaps more importantly these days, I’m still explaining that you don’t need permission to record something.  If you’re having a conversation with someone (in person or over the phone) and you or they choose to record it without any prior warning or agreement, that recording may still be used in evidence.  There may be arguments that I can run as to why it might be inadmissible (such as suggestions that the recording has been edited), but that is by no means a guarantee.

To illustrate my point, there has been a recent decision in a dispute between a shipping company and a member of their staff who fell over on the ship.

The fact that she fell and hurt herself was not in dispute.

The fact that the fall was largely the shipping company’s fault is also not disputed.

However, the extent of the employee’s injuries were hotly debated, with her saying she was practically wheelchair bound, and entitled to £10m, and them saying she was fine, and entitled to no more than £25k.

Shortly before the trial, the shipping company produced video evidence of the employee walking freely around her kitchen preparing a meal with members of her family.  No sign of a wheelchair or any other means of support.  The video was taken from the road outside her house.

The company sought to have the video submitted into evidence.

The employee fought hard against it – but lost!

The video will be relied upon at the trial.

That doesn’t mean that she will lose at trial – it may be that she can explain how the video is not inconsistent with the evidence of her injuries, so her claim is not automatically sunk without a trace, but the fact that the employer went to such lengths to get the evidence, and she fought so hard against it’s use, speaks volumes.

The fact that the Judge allowed it to be relied on, even though it meant having to adjourn a lengthy trial at short notice is also significant.

Which just goes to show that big brother really is watching you.

Kleyman & Co Solicitors.  The full service law firm.  Making sure you keep your head above water.