header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
09 May 2014
Issue: 7605 / Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

Disclosure & inspection of documents—Order for disclosure—Permission of court

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Tchenguiz and another v Director of the Serious Fraud Office [2014] EWHC 1315 (Comm), [2014] All ER (D) 191 (Apr)

Queen’s Bench Division, Commercial Court, Eder J, 29 Apr 2014

Permission of the court is required for disclosure under CPR 31.22(1)(b) to provide to counsel, not instructed in the case, for the purposes of obtaining independent advice.

Alex Bailin QC, Anton Dudnikov & John Robb (instructed by Shearman & Sterling LLP for the claimants. James Eadie QC, James Segan & Katherine Hardcastle (instructed by Slaughter and May) for the SFO.

CPR 31.22 provided: “(1) A party to whom a document has been disclosed may use the document only for the purpose of the proceedings in which it is disclosed except where—(a) the document has been read to or by the court, or referred to, at a hearing which has been held in public; (b) the court gives permission; or (c) the party who disclosed the document and the person to whom

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
NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: When post-breach events rewrite damages claims
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
NLJ this week: Supreme Court redraws unfair prejudice rules
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll