header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
30 September 2022 / Mary Young , Rebecca Ryan
Issue: 7996 / Categories: Features , Profession
printer mail-detail

Embargoes: ‘I saw it first!’

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
Placing restrictions on the sharing of draft judgments risks creating a host of problems for legal teams & their clients, as Mary Young & Rebecca Ryan explain
  • Seemingly in response to recent breaches of the embargo over draft judgments, some judges have begun to hand these down with additional conditions on circulation. 
  • Some drafts have been provided on extremely short notice, with parties or instructing solicitors first having sight of the judgment at practically the same time as the public and press. This can create difficulties for both clients and their legal teams, for a number of reasons.

It has long been the practice of civil courts who have reserved judgment to send a draft embargoed judgment to parties and their legal teams (counsel and instructing solicitors) in advance (usually a day or two) of the judgment being formally handed down publicly.

The purpose of handing down judgment in this way is ‘to enable the parties to make suggestions for the correction of errors, prepare submissions and agree

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll