Audio recordings and fraud in a Liquidation and Distribution: Can a file be reopened?

A liquidation and distribution has been completed. The parties have received what they were entitled to under the notarial statement, and the amounts have been paid. Can the matter still be brought into question if, years later, it appears that an important agreement was concealed? On 16 June 2026, the Court of First Instance of East Flanders, Ghent Division, considered that question. In its judgment, two interesting legal issues were addressed: the use of covertly made audio recordings as evidence and the consequences of fraud for a previously completed liquidation and distribution.

A Concealed Agreement with Significant Consequences

Years after payment of the reduction claim, the defendant parties rediscover a document setting out a signed agreement between one of the claimant parties and their spouse/father, whereby that claimant party waives his rights in two immovable properties.

This agreement had been concealed by that claimant party, relying on the ignorance of the defendant parties, in order to obtain, just like the other claimant party, the same reduction claim award.

This judgment addresses two subjects that are particularly interesting for legal practice.

The first concerns the use of audio recordings of conversations between the parties. These had been covertly recorded by one of the parties.

The court qualifies these audio recordings as unlawfully obtained evidence, because they were obtained in breach of privacy legislation, but does not exclude them from the proceedings.

Such unlawfully obtained evidence may only be excluded from the proceedings either where the law expressly provides for such exclusion, or where the evidence, by reason of the manner in which it was obtained, is affected by a defect undermining its reliability or jeopardising the right to a fair trial, in which case the court must take into account all the concrete circumstances of the case, including the manner in which the evidence was obtained, the circumstances in which the unlawfulness was committed, the seriousness of the unlawfulness and the extent to which the rights of the opposing party were infringed, the evidential necessity of the party that committed the unlawfulness, and the conduct of the opposing party.

The conditions for excluding the audio recordings from the proceedings were by no means satisfied.

A covert audio recording is therefore not automatically inadmissible as evidence, even where it has been obtained unlawfully.

The second subject concerns the (partial) nullity of a statement of liquidation and distribution resulting from the concealment of a previous agreement involving a waiver of rights, since it could not be otherwise than that the claimant party was aware of the existence of the agreement by which he had renounced his right to seek reduction and relied on the ignorance of the other parties.

A previous statement of liquidation and distribution and the closing report may be challenged anew insofar as they are affected by fraud.

The conclusion that can be drawn from this judgment is that, in cases of fraud, the defrauded party or parties may still rely on nullity and thereby have the statement of liquidation and distribution and the notary's closing report of the liquidation set aside insofar as the elements affected by the fraud are concerned.

Where fraud is suspected, an assessment of the concrete facts and documents is essential in order to determine which legal steps are possible and advisable.

FAIRWAY – Partners in Law and Mediation has lawyers with extensive experience in personal and family law and can assist you in proving certain facts.