Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2002] All ER (D) 173 (Jan)
Neutral Citation: [2002] EWCA Civ 02
Court: Court of Appeal, Civil Division

Aldous, Buxton and Longmore LJJ

Representation Simon Thorley QC, Andrew Waugh QC and Colin Birss (instructed by Taylor Joynson Garrett) for the claimant.
  David Young QC and Richard Meade (instructed by Bird & Bird) for the defendant.
Judgment Dates: 23 January 2002


Discovery - Collateral use of information obtained - Undertaking not to use disclosed documents for collateral or ulterior purpose - Material contained in document referred to in open court during proceedings - Material not of direct relevance to proceedings - Application to restrict or prohibit use of material - Judge refusing application on ground that there was no clear necessity for making such an order - Whether applicant having to show clear necessity for restriction or prohibition - CPR 31.22(1), (2).

The Case

In deciding whether to grant an application for an order under CPR31.22(2) to restrict or prohibit the use of a disclosed document which had been referred to in open court, the court would require specific reasons why a party would be damaged by publication of the document in question, and would have to balance such reasons with the centrality of the document in question to the proceedings and the fact that applying too demanding a standard could result in more hearings being heard in private.

Practice Areas

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