header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
27 January 2023 / Andrew Fremlin-Key
Issue: 8010 / Categories: Features , Disclosure , Media
printer mail-detail

Skeleton arguments: unwanted attention?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
107900
Inquisitive journalists, court documents & client privacy: Andrew Fremlin-Key recounts the lessons learned from Bouncylagoon

In brief

  • Covers recent caselaw on press applications for access to skeleton arguments and other court documents.
  • Refers to Bouncylagoon [2022] and Dring [2019].

In (the fantastically named) Bouncylagoon Ltd v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2022] UKFTT 361 (TC) (Bouncylagoon), the First-tier Tribunal (Tax) (FTT) granted a BBC journalist’s application for access to electronic copies of the parties’ skeleton arguments, but refused her application for a copy of the hearing bundle on the facts of the case. This relatively short decision serves as a strong warning to practitioners against assuming that an early procedural hearing cannot lead to interest and attention from the press and/or requests for documents from inquisitive journalists looking to generate news stories. Lawyers will need to consider their clients’ position and advise them accordingly on the balance of information that is included in court documents.

Brief background

The decision relates to an application made by a BBC journalist

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
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’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll