header-logo header-logo

Disclosure recommendations for data-heavy cases

An ‘intensive disclosure regime’ should be put in place to help judges manage data-heavy cases, according to the chair of the Independent Review of Disclosure and Fraud Offences, Jonathan Fisher KC.

Under this regime, once a case is designated ‘intensive’, the prosecution would provide the court with an updated disclosure management document including full details of any search technology they plan to use. The defence would identify trial issues, and the judge would hold a disclosure management hearing about four weeks later.

The report, 'Disclosure in the digital age', published by the Home Office last week, also recommends standardised training for disclosure officers, greater use of artificial intelligence (AI) and early-stage communication between investigators and prosecutors to identify a disclosure strategy.

Fisher KC considers the approach used in some US states where the defence is given full (albeit controlled) access to prosecution material, but rejects this as expensive and likely to increase delays.

The explosion in digital material is overwhelming criminal justice resources—Fisher KC cites a recent serious fraud case that generated 8.5 million documents plus a further 2.5 million defence documents. The largest Serious Fraud Office (SFO) case to date has 48 million documents.

Fisher KC, of Red Lion Chambers, writes: ‘If printed, the volume of material in an average SFO case would stack considerably higher than the Shard.’

The proliferation of data also affects less complex cases. The silk reports it took an average of 60 days to bring a case to court in 2014 and double that time in 2023.

While the relevant legislation—the Criminal Procedure and Investigation Act 1996—is ‘broadly sound’, problems do arise in its practical application. Therefore, Fisher KC recommends creating additional guidance and updating the Act to reflect recent caselaw.

Niall Hearty, partner at Rahman Ravelli, says: ‘Particularly notable is Fisher’s rejection of the keys to the warehouse idea—that suspects should have all the evidence.

‘While this is understandable, it may come as a disappointment to some defence lawyers. Equally notable is his recommendation that language should be inserted into the law that allows disclosure officers to use AI. This is perhaps the clearest acknowledgement of the challenges the system currently faces when it comes to disclosure.’

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Boies Schiller Flexner—Tim Smyth

Boies Schiller Flexner—Tim Smyth

Firm promotes London international arbitration specialist to partnership

Katten Muchin Rosenman—James Davison & Victoria Procter

Katten Muchin Rosenman—James Davison & Victoria Procter

Firm bolsters restructuring practice with senior London hires

HFW—Guy Marrison

HFW—Guy Marrison

Global aviation disputes practice boosted by London partner hire

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
A construction defect claim in the Court of Appeal offers a sharp lesson in pleading discipline. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains how a catastrophically drafted schedule of loss derailed otherwise viable claims. Across the areas explored in this week's column, the message is consistent: clarity, economy and proper pleading matter more than ever
back-to-top-scroll