Law Articles

Can You Record Your Ex in the Family Home? 22/09/2026

Cameras are now part of everyday life. Doorbell cameras, home security systems, mobile phones and even body-worn cameras make it very easy to record what is happening around us.

When a relationship breaks down, however, recording can become much more complicated.

One person may say that a camera is there for security or because they are concerned about their former partner's behaviour. The other may feel that they are being watched in their own home. Sometimes recordings are then relied upon as evidence in Family Court proceedings.

So, what does family law in England and Wales say about recording your former partner, particularly where you are separated but still living in the same house?

Is it against the law to record your former partner?

There is no single rule in family law which says that every secret recording is unlawful. Equally, the fact that someone owns or lives in a property does not mean that the Family Court will necessarily regard extensive monitoring of another person within that property as unimportant.

The circumstances matter.

There is an obvious difference between a doorbell camera which everyone knows is there and secretly placing cameras or listening devices inside a house so that you can monitor a former partner's conversations or movements.

When recordings become relevant to family proceedings, the court may therefore be interested in two different questions:

What does the recording show?

Why, and how, was the recording made?

A recording may provide useful evidence about an incident. At the same time, the way in which that recording was obtained may itself become relevant to the case.

What is a covert recording?

In May 2025, the Family Justice Council published detailed guidance about covert recordings in family proceedings concerning children.

A covert recording is broadly an audio or video recording made without the express knowledge and permission of the person being recorded.

This could include a hidden camera or microphone, but it could equally involve secretly recording a conversation using a mobile phone.

The Family Justice Council recognises that recordings can sometimes have genuine evidential value. For example, a person who says that abuse is taking place behind closed doors may consider that a recording provides evidence of something which would otherwise be difficult to prove.

However, the court may also need to consider whether a recording gives the complete picture. What happened immediately before it started? Has only part of the recording been provided? Has it been edited? Is there a longer recording which places a short clip in a different context?

The fact that something has been captured on camera does not necessarily end the court's enquiry.

Recording and Children Act proceedings

Where the Family Court is deciding arrangements for a child, the child's welfare is its paramount consideration.

This means that the court can consider not only what a recording shows but also the effect that one parent's behaviour may be having on the other parent and, ultimately, on the child.

The courts have already considered cases involving extensive surveillance between separated parents.

In HKS v HSM [2021] EWHC 3423 (Fam), a father had secretly made hundreds of hours of audio recordings of the mother in the family home. The recordings included occasions when he was not at the property and the mother was speaking privately to friends and family.

The court had found that the surveillance formed part of coercive and controlling behaviour. On appeal, the High Court considered the scale of the recording and its effect upon the mother to be relevant when considering the welfare of the child.

A more recent case, XZ v YZ [2026] EWHC 1521 (Fam), involved persistent filming of a mother during handovers using body-camera equipment.

Unlike a hidden camera, the mother knew she was being filmed. The High Court nevertheless confirmed that persistent recording of another parent against their wishes can, depending upon the circumstances, amount to an intrusive form of surveillance.

This is important because recording does not have to be secret before the court can consider the way it is being used.

Where allegations of domestic abuse or controlling behaviour are made in children proceedings, the court is also required to consider patterns of behaviour. It should not necessarily look at each incident in isolation if the allegation is that a number of incidents, taken together, demonstrate a wider pattern.

What about recording the children?

The position becomes particularly sensitive where children themselves are being deliberately recorded.

There is a difference between a child appearing incidentally on an ordinary home security camera and a parent deliberately recording a child to obtain evidence for family proceedings.

In M v F (Covert Recording of Children) [2016] EWFC 29, the court considered the covert recording of a child for evidence-gathering purposes.

The Family Justice Council's 2025 guidance makes clear that secretly recording children in this way is likely to raise significant concerns.

The court may consider the child's privacy, the effect on the child's trust in their parent and the emotional consequences for the child if they discover that their private conversations or interactions have been recorded.

It may also consider whether the child has effectively been drawn into the parents' dispute and what that says about the recording parent's ability to protect the child from adult issues.

Cameras, domestic abuse and non-molestation orders

Recording can also become relevant under the Family Law Act 1996, particularly where one person alleges domestic abuse or applies for a non-molestation order.

Recording another person does not automatically amount to molestation.

However, depending upon the circumstances, repeated filming or surveillance can form part of behaviour alleged to be intimidating, harassing, controlling or abusive.

In Re C (A Child) [2015] EWCA Civ 1096, a father continued making audio and video recordings connected with handovers despite previously agreeing that he would stop. A non-molestation order was made which prevented further recording.

The Court of Appeal upheld the decision. In the circumstances of that particular case, the use of the recording equipment was capable of amounting to intimidation and abuse.

The wider context is therefore important.

A camera installed for an ordinary security purpose is not necessarily comparable with someone repeatedly filming their former partner, monitoring their activities around the home or recording private conversations.

Surveillance may also form part of a wider allegation of controlling or coercive behaviour, including where the behaviour continues after the relationship has ended.

What if you have separated but are still living together?

Many separating couples continue living in the family home for weeks or months after their relationship has ended. Financial circumstances, children or uncertainty about what will happen to the property can make an immediate separation of households impossible.

This is an area where the use of cameras can become particularly contentious.

An external camera covering the front door or driveway for security purposes may raise very different considerations from a camera positioned inside the property to monitor the other person's activities or conversations.

If continuing to live together becomes unmanageable, the Family Law Act 1996 also gives the court power, in appropriate cases, to make occupation orders regulating who can live in the home or use particular areas of it.

When deciding whether to make an occupation order, the court can consider matters including the parties' conduct and the effect that the current situation is having on their health, safety and wellbeing.

The use of surveillance equipment within the home may therefore form part of the overall factual picture in an appropriate case.

Can a secret recording still be used in court?

Potentially, yes.

A recording is not automatically excluded from Family Court proceedings simply because the person being recorded did not know about it.

However, the court may want to know how the recording was obtained, why it was made and whether it is genuinely relevant to an issue which needs to be decided.

The court may also consider whether the complete recording has been provided, whether it has been edited or taken out of context, whether its authenticity is disputed and what impact the recording has had upon a child or another party.

The Family Justice Council recommends that the existence of covert recordings is raised at an early stage of proceedings so that the court can decide how they should be dealt with.

This can also have practical consequences. Large quantities of recordings may need to be reviewed and transcribed. If authenticity is disputed, further evidence may sometimes be required. That can increase both the length and cost of proceedings.

What about divorce and financial proceedings?

Since the introduction of no-fault divorce, this type of behaviour will not usually affect whether a divorce is granted.

Nor will recording a spouse ordinarily change how assets are divided in financial remedy proceedings. Conduct only affects a financial award in relatively exceptional circumstances under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973.

Privacy and sharing recordings

There can also be wider privacy and data protection issues surrounding recordings, particularly where footage is retained, shared with other people or captures areas outside a person's own property.

Extra care is required once a recording becomes part of Family Court proceedings.

Children proceedings are generally private. A recording which has been produced as evidence in a family case should not simply be circulated to friends, posted online or uploaded to social media. Different rules govern what information and evidence from family proceedings can lawfully be shared or published.

The important distinction

The Family Court does not treat every recording in the same way.

An ordinary security camera may have a legitimate purpose. A recording of a particular incident may provide important evidence about what happened.

At the other end of the spectrum, repeatedly monitoring a former partner's conversations, movements or interactions can itself become relevant to allegations of harassment, controlling behaviour or domestic abuse.

Where children are involved, there is an additional consideration. The court will look at the circumstances through the lens of the child's welfare, including the effect that the recording behaviour and the wider parental conflict may be having on them.

Anyone involved in family proceedings who has made recordings, discovered that they are being recorded, or is considering relying upon recordings as evidence should obtain advice about the particular circumstances before deciding how that material should be used.

For further information and advice on this issue, and other family law issues, please contact us for a free initial consultation.

This article provides general information about family law in England and Wales and is not a substitute for legal advice about individual circumstances.

Download the Family Justice Council guidance (PDF) here.