- Admissibility of EncroChat evidence in criminal proceedings (R v A and others)
- The law
- The preparatory hearing
- Case history
- Findings of fact
- How EncroChat worked:
- How the implant worked:
- The court’s decision
Corporate Crime analysis: In R v A and others, the Court of Appeal were asked to determine whether evidence obtained from the EncroChat application could be admitted in evidence in criminal proceedings, or whether it is excluded by the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 (IPA 2016). The Court of Appeal held that the EncroChat material was admissible as the material was being stored in or by the system at the relevant time (IPA 2016, s 4(4)(b)). They further held that the interception was carried out in accordance with a targeted equipment interference warrant under Part 5 and thus concluded that there was lawful authority for the interception. As the EncroChat material fell under the exception to IPA 2016, s 56(1)(a), the content of the communications were not prohibited from being disclosed. Alexandra Wilson, barrister at 5 St Andrew’s Hill, explains the decision of the Court of Appeal.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial