The High Court has refused an application seeking extensive disclosure of private messages between a woman and another man during ongoing financial proceedings following the end of a cohabiting relationship.
The respondent, Q.R., sought SMS messages, WhatsApp messages, emails and other communications involving the applicant, O.P., and a third party identified as AB between May 2025 and February 2026. He argued that the material could establish whether AB was providing financial support and could also bear on O.P.’s credibility.
Ms Justice Nuala Jackson accepted that financial assistance from AB could be relevant to the court’s assessment of O.P.’s resources in both the cohabitation proceedings and related child maintenance proceedings.
She also held that the discovery application was not too late, because the alleged ending of O.P.’s relationship with AB had emerged during the substantive hearing and could amount to the exceptional circumstances needed to permit a late application.
However, the judge found that the documents sought were far broader than necessary. Messages might reveal whether a relationship was continuing, but the relevant issue was not the relationship itself. It was the extent, if any, of financial support received by O.P.
The court also noted that Q.R. already had an alternative source of evidence in the form of private investigator surveillance reports accumulated over several months. The highly confidential nature of the requested communications and the proportionality of forcing their disclosure also weighed against the application.
Rather than ordering production of private correspondence, the court directed O.P. to swear a current, complete Affidavit of Means within seven days. It must identify any money, benefits in kind or other financial support received from AB between 1 May 2025 and 1 March 2026, including expenses paid for O.P. or her dependants.
Q.R. may then seek supporting documentation under the normal court rules.