Conversation recorded by Iphone - can this be used in District Court?

bobsman

Hi folks. Long story. I received a summons for Dublin District Court. Summons for Restraining Order. Basis was "Communicating by any means with or about the Applicant". Case was thrown out. As it should have been heard in "Naas District Court" and Applicant was told she must have sufficient evidence.

Applicant is my ex sister in law. She's separated from my brother. Her and I were quite close until mid 2023. We fell out partly due to break up with my brother and other things she has done to me. She approached me just before Xmas as my brother has full custody of their children and she wanted me to intervene. I refused and we had a huge row. I told her never to contact me again or call to my home.

After the first case was thrown out, I happened to bump into her. Public place. There was another spat (I should have walked off). I told her to "f** off and called her a crazy b***" and told her if she came near me or my family again, I would kill her" - (not my finest hour, I know).

She has now applied for another Restraining Order (Naas District Court). She told my brother that she recorded our spat on her Iphone and she will be presenting this at the District Court. Can she do this? Yes, I know I behaved badly but I lost my temper. 😥 I was not aware I was being recorded.

Any advice would be welcome

Claw Hammer

She can give oral evidence of what happened and say she had a recording as backup to assist her memory. This is a civil case on the balance of probabilities , not a criminal prosecution. There is no point in relying on technicalities in a situation like this.

magicbastarder

As above - she will be able to truthfully state to the court that you threatened her with 'i will kill you' and you'll have to lie to the court if you want to dispute that. She may be lying about having the recording, but if she does have it, you'll come out even worse if you deny it.

bobsman

Thank you all. No, I won't deny it. I know I was wrong. I didn't mean it literally btw 😐️

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123338356#Comment_123338356

Claw hammer - can you explain what you mean above? 😙

hullaballoo

he means it's not possible to bring the recording in and play it for the judge and let that be the evidence. on it's own it's hearsay evidence and not able to be used.

but if she says what happened under oath then the recording might be able to be used to back up what she said happened.

bobsman

Thank you Hullabaloo - much appreciated

Orban6

My understanding is that a recording made without the consent of the other party can not be used as evidence.

kirving

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123342312#Comment_123342312

No, that's not the case. Only one party needs to be aware (ie: to prevent phone hacking), but it's very context dependant.

https://www.dgod.ie/single-post/the-admissability-of-covert-recordings-in-legal-proceedings

Can the OP make life difficult for the application by requesting that they disclose all information they have on him under GDPR? (I know, and hate how badly GDPR is abused, and I only ask as GDPR is mentioned in the above link)

Peregrinus

I don't see how that would make life difficult for the applicant; the applicant wants to disclose the recording; it is the OP who would prefer that it not be disclosed.

All this would acheive is to give the OP notice of what's in the recording. But he already knows that; he was present when the recording was made.

hullaballoo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123342312#Comment_123342312

This is a persistent myth. Ireland is what TV lawyers call a one-party consent state, for the purposes of recording conversations. There are exceptions to this, competing rights, and GDPR does muddy the waters a little bit.

spaceHopper

Sounds like you fell into a trap, did they approach you first? When did the recording start? Before they approached you? Sounds to me like they provoked you and you fell for it. I'd get a solicitor and argue that there should be two orders one against you and one against them? Let them have the order, it will also keep them out of your life.

Claw Hammer

When you are in court accused of threatening to kill someone, and putting them in fear, it is not the place or time to start up about GDPR or entrapment. The O?P would have to apply for his own safety order and say he is in fear. It would look and sound stupid. When in a hole, stop digging.

csirl

GDPR does not apply to individuals recording for personal use.

hullaballoo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123357794#Comment_123357794

feels like an attempt to test cunningham's law but i'll take the bait.

gdpr applies to individuals, unlike the old pre-gdpr data protection regime that provided an exemption.

Calahonda52

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123346444#Comment_123346444

No they, just she, public place, no evidence of entrapment. False flag

The kill threat will be taken seriously so OP should thread carefully here.

spaceHopper

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123358728#Comment_123358728

You aren't making much sense maybe it's how you worded it.

I you re-read the OP's post.

The ex has lost custody of her kids to OP's brother.

And there have been two incidents. One resulted in case in Dublin which was thrown out because the OP's ex sister in-law brought it to the wrong court and didn't have enough evidence. There was a huge row before Christmas where the OP told the ex to never contact her (I think OP is female) again. Following this they crossed paths in public, and the ex approached the OP. Another row occurred and the OP told the ex to stay away from them and their family or else….

So the constant in this is the ex approaches the OP, without that there would be no trouble. Given the OP didn't know they were been recoded, my guess is that the ex, started recoding, approached the OP and provoked an incident to strengthen their case against them. The ex engineered the whole thing.

I think the best thing here for the OP is to consent to the order but to also have an order that the ex stays away from the OP.

HazeDoll

Let her have her restraining order. You don't want anything to do with her anyway. As long as there's no attempt to prevent you from going you from your local shop or anything it won't have any effect on you. Obviously you don't want her to have this victory but just dismiss it from your mind.

If my understanding is correct a restraining order places responsibilities on her too - she can't approach you either.

csirl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123358703#Comment_123358703

Not what the ODPC says.

Go to the data protection basics part of their site and the guidance note says:

"However, GDPR does not apply to the processing of personal data by an individual for purely personal or household activites, with no connection to a professional or commercial activity"

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123359366#Comment_123359366

https://www.lawsociety.ie/gazette/in-depth/cctv-data-protection

Read the Rynes case.

In any case it is not going to be relevant.

csirl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123359418#Comment_123359418

Interesting case, but it concerns the blanket recording of all people in a public place rather than a private conversation concerning a private matter between two people who know each other.

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123359813#Comment_123359813

According to what we are told it was in a public place where anybody who chanced by could have been included, It also adverts to the fact that "personal use" is given a very restricted meaning.