CriminalEvidence - telephone intercepts in European Union country - recordings admissible at English trialR v P and Others: HL (Lord Hutton, Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Cooke of Thorndon and Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough:11 December 2000A public prosecutor in European Union country A obtained an order from a magistrate authorising interception of telephone calls of X, a national of country A.

On the trial in England of the British appellants on drugs charges it was proposed to put recordings of their telephone conversations with X in evidence.

It was also proposed to call X to give evidence for the Crown.

The trial judge ruled that the recordings were admissible and the Court of Appeal dismissed appeals by the appellants.

They appealed.Held, dismissing the appeals, that no breach of article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (1953) (Cmnd 8969) had been shown where all had been done pursuant to statutory authority and subject to judicial supervision; that the criteria under article 6 as to whether a person would have a fair hearing were the same as under section 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and no breach had been shown; and that there was no rule of public policy, independently of statute, that intercept evidence should not be used at a criminal trial.

(WLR)