Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2011] All ER (D) 110 (Oct)
Neutral Citation: [2011] EWCA Civ 1154
Court: Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Judge:

Pill, Munby and Lewison LJJ
Representation Michael Brindle QC and Simon Goldstone (instructed by Zaiwalla & Co) for the claimants.
  Richard Lissack QC and Nicholas Medcroft (instructed by Berwin Leighton Paisner LLP) for the defendant.
Judgment Dates: 13 October 2011

Catchwords

Disclosure and inspection of documents - Production of documents - Redaction - Claimant commencing action against defendant bank - Defendant making standard disclosure of relevant documents - Names of employees redacted - Judge holding names be revealed through disclosure but ordering withholding on ground of public interest immunity - Whether judge erring in holding that names be revealed - CPR 31.6.

The Case

Disclosure and inspection of documents Production of documents. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that the defendant bank did not have to reveal the names of its employees who had reported their suspicions of money laundering on the part of the claimants as the disclosure requirements of CPR31.6 had not been met.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.

Lexis®Library

  • An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
  • Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
  • The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
  • Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases