Courts in England and Wales are now confiscating Meta glasses from anyone entering judicial buildings, joining a mounting backlash against the wearable devices. According to His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunal Service (CTS), the devices are banned because taking images or videos inside courtrooms is strictly prohibited under UK law and can be prosecuted as contempt of court.
Court Bans and Strict Confiscation Policies
The policy applies across all criminal, civil, and family courts managed by the CTS. While lawyers and members of the public routinely enter judicial buildings with standard smartphones capable of recording audio and video, the agency confirmed that no such exceptions will be made for smart glasses.
A source told the Guardian that users bringing the devices into courts or tribunals will have them confiscated immediately upon entry and returned only when they leave the building. Smartphones, by contrast, are permitted under the strict condition that users do not deploy them to record court procedures.
This UK enforcement follows similar measures announced by courts in New York last month. The New York unified court system instituted a ban to ensure individuals cannot surreptitiously record proceedings, requiring visitors to voucher their smart glasses for safekeeping with uniformed personnel during their visit.
Legal Precedents and High Court Scrutiny
Concerns over the technology are not entirely hypothetical. Earlier this year, a claimant in a high court property dispute was accused of wearing smart glasses and receiving remote coaching while giving evidence.
Mrs Justice Agnello addressed Laimonas Jakstys during a case concerning the directorship of a property company, stating he had been assisted or coached in his replies during cross-examination. Jakstys denied using the smart glasses to receive answers and denied they were connected to his phone. The CTS stated it does not hold official figures on the number of incidents involving smart glasses brought into or used within courts.
The legal friction extends internationally. In February, security personnel working for Meta Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg wore Meta glasses during a high-profile social media addiction trial in California. Judge Carolyn B. Kuhl explicitly threatened the security team with contempt of court if they recorded any of the proceedings.
Did you know? Meta sold 7 million pairs of its smart glasses last year, with retail prices ranging from £269 to £469 per pair.
Public Backlash and Privacy Concerns
Beyond the courtroom, privacy fears have led to widespread informal bans. A growing number of restaurants, theatres, and pubs across the UK, including pub chain Wetherspoons, have prohibited the devices, earning them the label “pervert glasses” due to fears that users can film people without consent.
Meta has defended the hardware design, noting that a pulsing light becomes visible to people nearby whenever the glasses record video. A company spokesperson added that frequently updated tamper detection technology is deployed to prevent users from covering this indicator light during recordings. Meta declined to comment specifically on the recent court bans.
Frequently Asked Questions
Are smartphones also banned from UK courts?
No. Lawyers and members of the public are permitted to bring smartphones into courts and tribunals, provided they are not used to record court procedures.
What happens to confiscated smart glasses?
According to CTS sources, devices brought into judicial buildings are confiscated at entry and returned to the owner upon leaving the facility.
Does Meta include any privacy indicators on the glasses?
Yes. According to Meta, the glasses display a visible pulsing light when recording, and the company utilizes tamper detection technology to stop users from blocking the light.
Have you encountered smart glass restrictions in public venues? Share your thoughts in the comments below, or subscribe to our daily newsletter for more updates on privacy and technology law.
Keep reading