header-logo header-logo

10 June 2016 / Robin Preston-Jones , Kathryn Garbett
Issue: 7702 / Categories: Features , Fraud
printer mail-detail

In the club

nlj_7702_garbett

Kathryn Garbett & Robin Preston-Jones discuss confidentiality clubs

Litigation is usually an open, public process. The Civil Procedure Rules allow for non-parties to access pleadings, judgments and orders from the court file in most circumstances. Hearings are usually open to journalists, interested third parties and/or curious tourists to attend.

Within the litigation process, parties are required to disclose all their relevant documents regardless of how confidential they are (with only legally privileged documents excluded). Adverse parties to whom such documents are disclosed are, ordinarily, free to share those documents within the broad legal team (including with client representatives, potential witnesses and experts) and use them for the purposes of the proceedings in which they are disclosed.

The appropriateness of such “open justice” is rarely questioned. Public access to the court room and the court file is based on the principle that not only must justice be done, it must be seen to be done. It is an important part of the common law adversarial system that parties are required to be open, sharing the documents

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll