Legal News

Admissibility of EncroChat evidence in criminal proceedings (R v A and others)

Admissibility of EncroChat evidence in criminal proceedings (R v A and others)
Published on: 23 February 2021
Published by: LexisPSL
  • 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

Article summary

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. or take a trial to read the full analysis.

Popular documents