C Plc and W v P and Secretary of State for the Home Office and the Attorney General: ChD 26 May 2006

The claimant sought damages from the first defendant for breach of copyright. An ex parte search order had been executed, with the defendant asserting his privilege against self-incrimination. As computer disks were examined, potentially unlawful images of children were found. The searching officer asked the court for directions as to what to do.
Held: The privilege against self incrimination applied to statements and written material made or created by the defendant under compulsion. It did not apply to self-standing evidence such as the material in this case.

Evans-Lombe J
Times 08-Jun-2006, [2006] EWHC 1226 (Ch), [2007] 3 WLR 437
Civil Procedure Act 1997 7, Civil Evidence Act 1968 14, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78
England and Wales
CitedRank Film Distributors v Video Information Centre HL 1-Mar-1981
The plaintiffs claimed large-scale copyright infringement, and obtained Anton Pillar orders. The House considered the existence of the privilege against self-incrimination where the Anton Piller type of order has been made. The Court of Appeal had . .
CitedRegina v Hertfordshire County Council ex parte Green Environmental Industries Limited, Moynihan CA 9-Oct-1997
There was no protection against self-incrimination where information was properly required by the Waste Regulation Authority to carry out its duties. . .
CitedO Ltd v Z ChD 23-Feb-2005
The court was asked whether a search under a court order of a former employee’s computer for materials alleged to have been taken, which discovered material possession of which itself was a crime, infringed the defendant’s rights against self . .
CitedStott (Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline) and Another v Brown PC 5-Dec-2000
The system under which the registered keeper of a vehicle was obliged to identify herself as the driver, and such admission was to be used subsequently as evidence against her on a charge of driving with excess alcohol, was not a breach of her right . .
CitedRio Tinto Zinc Corporation v Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Re Westinghouse Electric Corpn Uranium Contract Litigation MDL Docket No 235 (No 2) HL 1977
The court considered a claim that a party was not compelled to give evidence where it might incriminate him: ‘No one is bound to furnish information against himself. It [the common law] says: ‘If a witness claims the protection of the court, on the . .
CitedWarman International Ltd and Others v Envirotech Australia Pty Ltd and Others 1986
(Australia High Court) The court considered an application that the privilege against self incrimination be allowed to prevent a requirement to produce documents at court under a sub-poena: ‘Production is to the Court. Unless and until the contents . .
CitedDownie and Others v Coe and Others (a Firm) CA 28-Nov-1997
A claim to a right of a witness against self incrimination must be made by that person in person on oath though substantiation elsewhere. . .
CitedTriplex Safety Glass Co Ltd v Lancegaye Safety Glass (1934) Ltd 1939
A company is to have the benefit of protection against self incrimination just as much as an individual. A court is not bound without more, by a claim to the privilege by a party to litigation. . .
CitedAttorney-General’s Reference (No 7 of 2000) CACD 29-Mar-2001
The defendant had been convicted of offences under the Insolvency Act. Evidence of his gambling was found in cheque stubs, bank statements, returned cheques and a betting file containing loose gambling statements by way of computer print outs . .
CitedRegina v Kearns CACD 22-Mar-2002
The defendant had failed to account for the disappearance of a substantial part of his estate to the official receiver following his bankruptcy. He appealed his conviction for failing to provide an account, saying that the requirement to provide . .
CitedRegina v Khan (Attorney-General’s Reference No 7 of 2000); Same v Saunders (AG Ref 10 of 2000); Same v Paul (AG Ref 9 of 2000); Same v Wakelin (AG Ref 8 of 2000) CACD 15-Jun-2000
Robbery committed on public transport, against young persons, will lead to a custodial sentence, save in wholly exceptional circumstances. There is a need to provide deterrence, for what has become a common crime. Sentences of between twelve and . .
CitedThompson Newspapers Ltd v Director of Investigation and Research 1990
(Supreme Court of Canada) The court considered a claim to exercise the privilege against self-incrimination.
Held: Whereas a compelled statement is evidence that would not have existed independently of the exercise of the powers of compulsion, . .
CitedX and Y v The Netherlands ECHR 26-Mar-1985
A parent complained to the police about a sexual assault on his daughter a mentally defective girl of 16. The prosecutor’s office decided not to prosecute provided the accused did not repeat the offence. X appealed against the decision and requested . .
CitedA T and T Istel Ltd v Tully HL 9-Sep-1992
The second plaintff had agreed to supply computer systems to a health authority. New owners of the company discovered allegations that the contract had been operated fraudulently. An order had been obtained for production of documents, but the order . .
CitedKay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others HL 8-Mar-2006
In each case the local authority sought to recover possession of its own land. In the Lambeth case, they asserted this right as against an overstaying former tenant, and in the Leeds case as against gypsies. In each case the occupiers said that the . .
CitedRegina v Boyes 27-May-1861
A defendant seeking to avoid answering questions so as not to incriminate himself is to be given some understanding and latitude in respecting his own interpretation. The beneficiary of a pardon could be called upon to incriminate himself because he . .
CitedRe Arrows Ltd No 4 HL 1995
The Court of Appeal had allowed an appeal from the judge who had directed that the transcripts of examinations of a director of an insolvent company under section 236 on the Director of the Serious Fraud Office undertaking that the transcripts would . .
CitedZ And Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 10-May-2001
Four children complained that, for years before they were taken into care by the local authority, its social services department was well aware that they were living in filthy conditions and suffering ‘appalling’ neglect in the home of their . .
CitedOsman v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-Oct-1998
Police’s Complete Immunity was Too Wide
(Grand Chamber) A male teacher developed an obsession with a male pupil. He changed his name by deed poll to the pupil’s surname. He was required to teach at another school. The pupil’s family’s property was subjected to numerous acts of vandalism, . .
CitedL v United Kingdom ECHR 2000
The court coinsidered a claim for the privilege against self-incrimination: ‘As held in Saunders v. United Kingdom . . the right not to incriminate oneself is primarily concerned with respecting the will of the accused person to remain silent and . .

Cited by:
AppliedMalik v Manchester Crown Court and others; Re A Admn 19-Jun-2008
The claimant was a journalist writing about terrorism. He had interviewed a man with past connections with Al-Qaeda, and he now objected to a production order for documents obtained by him in connecion with his writings. The court had acted on . .
CitedRegina v S and A CACD 9-Oct-2008
The defendant appealed against his conviction under the 2000 Act for failing to disclose the key used to encrypt a computer file. He was subject to a control order as a suspected terrorist. As the police raided his house, they found the key had been . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Human Rights

Leading Case

Updated: 15 January 2022; Ref: scu.242224