header-logo header-logo

Collateral use: compulsion is not enough

26 March 2019 / Sophia Purkis , Victoria Prince
Issue: 7835 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail
The courts can & will exercise their discretion in determining if collateral use is permissible, say Sophia Purkis & Victoria Prince

Disclosure, the use of documents and the interrelationship between proceedings—be they criminal and/or civil, and brought in different or the same jurisdictions—are all topics which are increasingly exercising the courts.

Mr Justice Hildyard’s recent judgment in ACL Netherlands BV (as successor to Autonomy Corporation Ltd) and other companies v Lynch and another [2019] EWHC 249 (Ch) provides an insightful illustration of the principles governing the collateral use of documents and witness statements required to comply with foreign legal obligations.

The claim

Subsidiaries of a US company, Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE), brought a US$ multi-billion claim in England against two defendants alleged to have fraudulently manipulated the accounting system of a company acquired by the Hewlett-Packard group. The trial of that claim was listed to start in March 2019.

US criminal proceedings arising out of the same circumstances had resulted in a conviction against the second defendant

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll