header-logo header-logo

11 August 2011 / Vanessa Van Breda , Mark Surguy
Issue: 7478 / Categories: Features , E-disclosure , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Between a rock and a hard place

Vanessa van Breda & Mark Surguy approach the conflicting forces of duty & disclosure

A solicitor has duties to his client and the court during the disclosure process. Increasingly a tension occurs between the two, especially as in-house counsel seeks to control more of the process to manage costs This article explores the tensions in the light of Common Market Commercial Services AVV (CMCS) v Taylor and Taylor v Stoutt, CMCS and Jakober [2011] EWHC 324 (Ch), [2011] All ER (D) 269 (Feb) (CMCS).

Brief facts of CMCS

The proceedings arose out of a dispute over the beneficial ownership of a property following a divorce. The property was owned by a Netherlands Antilles bearer share company owned or controlled by a Swiss national living in Geneva.

The company sought possession of the property and the wife sought a transfer to herself on the basis that the funds to acquire the property came from the husband. She sought disclosure from the Swiss national in order to prove

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll