I have a question regarding the validity of evidence presentable in court. Can one side produce evidence that has been obtained through illegal means such as theft, corporate espionage, or similar? Will the evidence or any conclusion derived from it become inadmissible due to being "the fruit of a poisoned tree"?
Thank you for your question. In legal proceedings, evidence that has been obtained through illegal means, such as theft or corporate espionage, is generally considered inadmissible. This principle is often referred to as the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine. According to this doctrine, if evidence is found to be a direct result of illegal activities, it is tainted and cannot be used in court.
Courts aim to discourage illegal behavior and uphold the integrity of the legal system by excluding evidence that has been unlawfully obtained. However, there are exceptions and nuances to this rule, so it is essential to seek legal advice to understand how the specific circumstances of a case may impact the admissibility of evidence.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
Thank you for your question. In legal proceedings, evidence that has been obtained through illegal means, such as theft or corporate espionage, is generally considered inadmissible. This principle is often referred to as the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine. According to this doctrine, if evidence is found to be a direct result of illegal activities, it is tainted and cannot be used in court.
Courts aim to discourage illegal behavior and uphold the integrity of the legal system by excluding evidence that has been unlawfully obtained. However, there are exceptions and nuances to this rule, so it is essential to seek legal advice to understand how the specific circumstances of a case may impact the admissibility of evidence.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
A blanket opinion cannot be given as to whether such documents would be admissible. I personally know a case where a writ petition filed against the company was dismissed as the petitioner had annexed a lot of documents which were found to have been stolen from office records. On being pointed out about this, the High Court promptly dismissed it saying 'those who seek equity must come with clean hands'.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
1656From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively - share and document your knowledge. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Join & Be Part Of Our Community.
Trust Evidence for Effective Management.pdf