and whether the recording has the effect of legal evidence

If the means of evidence collection are lawful, it has legal effect.

Article 68 of the Several Provisions on Evidence in Civil Proceedings stipulates that evidence obtained by means that infringe upon the lawful rights and interests of others or violate the prohibitive provisions of the law cannot be used as the basis for determining the facts of a case. In the case of audio recordings, this means that if the holder of the recording evidence violates the privacy of others or violates the prohibition of the law, such as recording the privacy of others or eavesdropping on the audio recordings obtained at his or her work or residence, the use of such recordings will still be excluded.

However, "undoubted audio-visual materials or copies verified with audio-visual materials that are supported by other evidence and obtained by lawful means" are probative.

In order for the recording evidence to become the basis for a judgment, two conditions must be met: first, the recording evidence must be obtained in accordance with the provisions of the law, the conversation between the two parties to the recording was not restricted at the time, it was a conscious and free expression of intent, it was good faith and necessary, and it was for the purpose of protecting the lawful rights and interests of the parties and ascertaining the true circumstances of the case; Second, the recording evidence has good technical conditions, the identity of the interlocutor is clear, the content is clear, it is objective, true and coherent, it has not been edited or forged, the content has not been altered, there is no doubt that there is other evidence to corroborate.

Can audio recordings be evidence?

Recording evidence that meets the following conditions is legally binding:

1.The recording evidence presented by the parties has not been edited, edited, or forged, is closely connected, and the content has not been tampered with, and has objective authenticity and coherence.

2.Audio evidence must be obtained in accordance with the law. If the holder of the recording evidence uses the audio recording materials that invade the privacy of others or violate the prohibitions of the law, such as the audio recordings obtained by eavesdropping at his workplace or residence, it is evidence obtained in violation of the prohibitions of the law and cannot be used as evidence in litigation.

3.The other party did not raise a refutation or the reasons for the rebuttal were not established. When the court uses the recording evidence as the basis for adjudicating a case, it should also examine whether the recording evidence is doubtful.

If the opposing party challenges the audio recording and adduces sufficient evidence to refute it, the audio recording will lose its probative force; If there is not sufficient evidence to refute it, the court should confirm the probative force of the recording evidence.

Legal basis] Article 63 of the Civil Procedure Law, evidence includes:

1) Statements of the parties;

2) documentary evidence; 3) physical evidence; 4) audio-visual materials;

e) electronic data;

6) witness testimony;

7) Appraisal opinions;

8) Inquest records. Evidence must be verified to be true before it can be used as a basis for determining facts.

The recording has legal effect as evidence, and I have used it in previous lawsuits.

I don't know what your situation is, I'll tell you about me, I had a labor dispute with my boss before, but I didn't have any evidence, so I called the boss and my leader, and I directly recorded it with my mobile phone when I called.

I put the recording into words and then marked all the highlights and handed them to the judge.

But you have to pay attention to one problem, that is, the other party may not admit that the recording is his, and then you will have to apply for an authentication.

Before the appraisal, you can ask the judge that if the recording is determined to be the defendant's, then the defendant will be required to pay all the fees.

My boss directly admitted that he was the one in the recording because he had no experience.

One of them is the recording, be sure to record what you want to prove.

For example, if I want to ask for a salary, then the recording must be talked about: the boss owes me a salary that has not been paid, how much is the salary per month, and how many months I owe, these contents must be there, otherwise the evidence is insufficient, and it will be very troublesome in the later stage.

Not necessarily. If it is proved that it is indeed the person's voice and not an imitation of the voice, the recording has legal force as evidence.

Of course, it has legal effect, which means that it can be used as circumstantial evidence, and cannot be directly referred to as favorable evidence.

Can such recordings be used as legal evidence without the consent of the other party? Can a surreptitious recording be used as evidence? OK!

The Civil Procedure Law and the Several Provisions on Evidence clearly stipulate that evidence includes: 1Documentary Evidence 2

Physical Evidence 3Statement of the Parties 4Audio-visual and audio-visual materials5

Electronic Information Materials 6Appraisal inquest 7, expert opinion. 8. Witness testimony.

So, the recording is one of the evidence. However, it can only be used as formal evidence after being cross-examined and admitted by the opposing party and accepted by the judge in court.

First of all, I would like to say that more than 90 percent of the audio recording evidence we encounter in judicial practice is secretly recorded. In other words, if the other party agrees to the recording, then it is likely that the content will be written directly to form documentary evidence, and there is no need for recording at all. Secondly, the key to whether a piece of evidence can be used by the court lies in whether the evidence itself conforms to the three characteristics of evidence, that is, authenticity, legitimacy, and relevance.

Authenticity is also known as objectivity, that is, whether the content of the evidence and proof is objectively true, and whether it has been modified or cut; If yes, then the rules of evidence are met, and the court will.

Of course not, playing ** does not invade privacy; For example, is it illegal to invite people to come to the door to talk and record them? Of course not, chatting at home doesn't invade privacy; For example, is it illegal to install a recording device in someone else's home? Of course, the home is a private space, and secretly recording is obviously a violation of privacy.

Secretly recorded recordings can be used as legal evidence, but there are prerequisites: unauthorized recordings must not be formed or obtained by methods that infringe upon the lawful rights and interests of others, violate legal prohibitions, or seriously violate public order and good customs. It's a good thing to have a sense of evidence in life, but you must pay attention to explaining the complete story of the matter when secretly recording, such as who it is, because of what, and now I ask you for money, and it needs to be connected back and forth, so that people can know the actual factual process as soon as they listen to it.

In general, it can be used as legal evidence, but if it is by means of coercion and threat, the recording obtained against the will of others is not legal.

Evidence obtained secretly has no legal effect, and must be legally obtained in order to have corresponding legal benefits.

The content of the recording should be truthful and coherent, and it must not be, and during the recording process, the other party's speech is an expression of true meaning, and there is no coercion and threats from others. The facts that need to be proved in the case shall be fully explained, and the recording materials should not be deleted, and the original recording materials should be retained. Where the above conditions are met, the court shall confirm that the recording evidence is valid.

Legal basis: Article 63 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China Evidence includes:

1) Statements of the parties;

2) documentary evidence; 3) physical evidence;

4) audio-visual materials;

5) Electronic data car evidence;

6) witness testimony;

7) Appraisal opinions;

8) Inquest records.

Evidence must be verified to be true before it can be used as a basis for determining facts.

If the holder of the recording evidence uses a recording that violates the privacy of others or violates the prohibition of the law, such as recording the privacy of others or eavesdropping on the audio recordings obtained at their work or residence, the use of the recording will still be excluded. However, "undoubted audio-visual materials or copies verified with audio-visual materials that are supported by other evidence and obtained by lawful means" are probative. For this recorded evidence to be the basis of a verdict, two conditions must be met:

First, the acquisition of recorded evidence must comply with the provisions of the law, and the conversation between the two parties to the recording was not restricted at the time, and it was a conscious and free expression of intent, which was good faith and necessary, and was for the purpose of protecting the lawful rights and interests of the parties and ascertaining the true circumstances of the case; Second, the recording evidence has good technical conditions, the identity of the interlocutor is clear, the content is clear, it is objectively true and coherent, it has not been edited or forged by those who are capable of it, and the content has not been altered, there is no doubt that there is other evidence to support it.

Article 63 of the Civil Procedure Law, evidence includes: (1) the statements of the parties; 2) documentary evidence; 3) physical evidence; 4) audio-visual materials; e) electronic data; 6) witness testimony; 7) Appraisal opinions; 8) Inquest records. Evidence must be verified to be true before it can be used as a fundamental basis for determining facts.

Legal analysis: Recording evidence of civil secretly recording does not have legal effect, and recording evidence that meets the following conditions has legal effect:

1. The recording evidence presented by the parties has not been edited, edited or forged, is closely connected, the content has not been tampered with, and has objective authenticity and coherence;

2. The omission of recording evidence is in accordance with the law;

3. If the parties do not have sufficient evidence to refute it, the court shall confirm the probative force of the evidence in the recording.

Legal basis: Article 27 of the "Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings" People's courts may require the parties or litigants to be present when conducting evidence preservation. On the basis of the parties' applications and specific circumstances, the people's courts may employ methods such as sealing, seizure, audio or video recording, reproduction, appraisal, and inquest to preserve evidence, and make a record.

Where the purpose of evidence preservation is met, the people's court shall select the preservation measure that has the least impact on the interests of the evidence holder.