header-logo header-logo

Norwich Pharmacal orders: still in vogue?

16 June 2017 / Jonathan Cohen
Issue: 7750 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail
nlj_7750_cohen

Flexible & adaptable to many situations, the Norwich Pharmacal order remains as useful as ever, says Jonathan Cohen

  • Norwich Pharmacal orders for disclosure are granted against third parties innocently caught up in wrongdoing.
  • They have widespread application and have been further developed in case law.

A Norwich Pharmacal order may be an old remedy, but it still has modern application. Its use in the past three years alone demonstrates its continuing flexibility. Norwich Pharmacal orders are court orders to disclose information or documents, granted against third parties who have become mixed up in wrongdoing through no fault of their own. They date back to a 1974 House of Lords case concerning the Norwich Pharmaceutical Company, Norwich Pharmacal v Customs and Excise Commissioners [1974] AC 133, [1973] 2 All ER 943.

The case

Norwich Pharmacal was the victim of a patent infringement. It knew 30 consignments of the compound, Furazolidone, which was covered by its patent, had been imported into the UK without licence and therefore in breach of

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll