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
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
LexisNexis Legal Awards 2026—the winners!
The winners of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2026 have now been announced, marking another outstanding celebration of excellence, innovation, and impact across the legal profession
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’
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll