A person commits an offence1 if, without lawful authority2:
(1) he uses wireless telegraphy apparatus3 with intent to obtain information as to the contents, sender or addressee of a message (whether sent by means of wireless telegraphy or not) of which neither he nor a person on whose behalf he is acting is an intended recipient4; or
(2) he discloses information as to the contents, sender or addressee of such a message5.
A person commits an offence consisting in the disclosure of information only if the information disclosed by him is information that would not have come to his knowledge
**Trials are provided to all LexisPSL and LexisLibrary content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
To view the latest version of this document and millions of others like it, sign-in to LexisLibrary or register for a free trial.
EXISTING USER? SIGN IN
TAKE A FREE TRIAL
You may apply simplified customer due diligence (SDD) measures in relation to particular business relationships or transactions which you determine present a low risk of money laundering or terrorist financing, having taken into account:•your organisation-wide risk assessment—see Practice Note:
Tipping off and prejudicing an investigationIt would undermine the benefit to the authorities if, a suspicious activity report (SAR) having been made, the alleged offender were to be made aware of the interest in their activities so that they could take steps to cover up their misdeeds or disappear.
This Precedent letter covers disclosure obligations under CPR 31. It does not apply to proceedings subject to the disclosure pilot scheme under CPR PD 51U. For guidance on the disclosure pilot scheme, see Practice Note: Business and Property Courts—the disclosure pilot scheme. For a client letter on
This Practice Note considers the doctrine of forum non conveniens, also referred to as the appropriate forum or the proper place for a dispute to be determined. This doctrine is of relevance when determining whether the courts of England and Wales have jurisdiction to hear a dispute and is applied
0330 161 1234