 |
 |
In message <[log in to unmask]>, c.k.christacopoulos@dund ee.ac.uk writes >---------------------------- >The information in this e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may >be subject to legal profesional privilege. It is intended solely for the >attention and use of the named addressee(s). If you are not the intended >recipient, or person responsible for delivering this information to the >intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately. Unless you are >the intended recipient or his/her representative you are not authorised >to, and must not, read, copy, distribute, use or retain this message or >any part of it. >----------------------------- >[As you can tell I picked it up from one of the previous messages] > >Has this thing got any validity in law. It won't stop anyone malicious >intercepting mail and then putting it to improper use. Therefore >what is it trying to achieve? > >Is it the case of something like ... if it is presented to court as >evidence by a person that should not have it in the first place it will >become inadmissible ... > >Are such dislaimers worth the bytes they occupy or are they shouting to >someone that there is something really important in this message. > It fixes the recipient (or interceptor) with notice that the e-mail is confidential. It does as much as can be done >Any thoughts appreciated. >============================================== -- David Swarbrick, Solicitor. Brighouse, West Yorkshire. Tel: +44(0)1484 722531 Fax: +44(0)1484 716617 e-mail [log in to unmask] http://www.swarb.co.uk/ (Office) http://www.swarb.demon.co.uk/ (Home) Home of the law-index to 8800+ cases - 'damn fine webbery" %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%