Two recent developments have made it easier for those litigating in England and Wales to obtain information and documents from third parties outside the jurisdiction: the first is a new jurisdictional gateway for applications for information from third parties outside the jurisdiction; the second is the Court of Appeal’s decision in Gorbachev v Guriev, in which a third-party disclosure order was made against parties outside the jurisdiction in respect of documents within the jurisdiction.
Intellectual Property Enterprise Court: Doffing the Cap to Recoverable Costs
Earlier this month the rules governing costs in the UK’s Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) were updated for the first time since the birth of IPEC back in 2013. In this blog post we look at what has changed, and what the changes actually mean for would-be claimants.
Injunctions against “persons unknown” – uncertainty ahead
Injunctions against “persons unknown” have increased in popularity in recent years; however, the recent judgment in MBR Acres Ltd and others v McGivern [2022] EWHC 2072 has cast doubt on the how widely these injunctions can take effect in future. Following this judgment parties will have to carefully consider whether it will be possible to prove an unknown person is bound by the injunction and it can be enforced against them.
Court of Appeal Lifts Stay to Allow English Court to Determine the Validity of Arbitration Clause
The Court of Appeal of England and Wales has set aside a stay in order to allow the English court to determine the validity of an arbitration clause contained in a contract between an English consumer and a foreign company. The stay had been imposed by the Commercial Court under section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996 in favour of arbitral proceedings in New York. The Court of Appeal considered that the case had significant implications for consumers in general and it was therefore important that the issues were considered and ruled upon in public in an English court rather than privately in a US arbitration.
In-house E-Disclosure Teams Should Not Be Vilified
Cabo Concepts Ltd v MGA Entertainments (UK) Ltd & Another has caused much agitation among litigators and e-disclosure professionals. On the face of it, the case appears to be a warning against conducting e-disclosure in-house. However, properly administered, the use of in-house technology and teams can be highly effective and efficient. Here are our key pointers for companies with in-house capabilities to ensure the smooth running of the disclosure process.
Courts continue to deter satellite litigation on witness statements
Despite having broad case management powers in respect of trial witness statements that do not comply with the procedural rules, judges are notably unwilling to impose the more draconian sanctions available to them. This week, in McKinney Plant & Safety Ltd v The Construction Industry Training Board, a claimant who had committed multiple breaches of the rules and had exacerbated those breaches by being entirely dismissive of the defendant’s objections, escaped with a relatively lenient adverse costs order.
Court Rejects Attempt to Commence Claims for 3,500 Claimants in Single Claim Form
The High Court of England and Wales has provided guidance on when it is permissible to combine several individuals’ claims in a single claim form.
Service by Blockchain Technology
In another example of the court embracing technology in the furtherance of access to justice, the High Court of England and Wales has permitted service by way of a non-fungible token.
Heavy Redactions Subject to Increased Vigilance from the Court
The High Court of England and Wales has ordered a defendant to redo a significant portion of his disclosure as a result of a failure to properly explain the basis for heavy redactions across a significant number of documents
Exercise to ‘Provide Ballast’ to Irrelevant Claims Not Covered by Litigation Privilege
When litigation is either underway or in prospect, the unwary can fall into the trap of assuming that everything they do that is related to that dispute (however tenuously) will be covered by litigation privilege. The decision in Kyla Shipping Co Ltd & Another v Freight Trading Ltd & Others is a salutary reminder to remain clear headed in respect of privilege issues.