Qatar Investment and Projects Development & Anor v Phoenix Ancient Art S.A. & Ors
MR JUSTICE GARNHAM : 1. I will indicate now that, for the reasons advanced by the defendant, it seems to me it is proper and appropriate that that part of these proceedings which deals with the matters contained in the ninth witness statements of Mr Tapper and Mr Aboutaam should be dealt with in private. I make it clear, however,...
2 min de lecture · 412 mots
MR JUSTICE GARNHAM : 1. I will indicate now that, for the reasons advanced by the defendant, it seems to me it is proper and appropriate that that part of these proceedings which deals with the matters contained in the ninth witness statements of Mr Tapper and Mr Aboutaam should be dealt with in private. I make it clear, however, that that restriction will not apply to the judgment, subject to any further application being made upon receipt of the draft judgment. 2. That, I think, deals with the proposed order number 1, namely: “Pursuant to CPR 39.2(3), such part of the hearing of the claimants’ application as deals with and considers the Aboutaam evidence and the Tapper evidence shall be held in private”. 3. I decline to make an order now that the judgment will be redacted accordingly; instead, the judgment will be produced in draft in the usual way and I will hear any applications for redaction upon receipt of it. I am not going to fore-guess that outcome. 4. As to paragraph 2, the defendant asks for an order that the Aboutaam evidence and the Tapper statement shall not be retained on the court file or, in the alternative, that any application by any non-party to obtain from the court records a copy of that evidence shall be made on notice to the parties. I prefer the second of those two options. I decline to make an order that it should not be retained on the court file. It seems to me it is important that the court file is complete in this regard, but I see the force of the alternative submission and therefore make an order in those terms. 5. As to the third order that the defendants seek, namely an order pursuant to CPR 31.22(2) and as to the use to be made of the documents contained in exhibit HA9 outside these proceedings, I reserve the position until I have heard further argument. I indicate now that the only question live is whether or not the claimants should be entitled to use that document in enforcement proceedings, and notably enforcement proceedings in other jurisdictions. 6. The question of costs I will deal with at the conclusion of the case as a whole. (See separate transcript for continuation of proceedings) — — — — — — — — — —
Sources officielles : consulter la page source
Open Justice Licence (The National Archives).
Articles similaires
A propos de cette decision
Décisions similaires
Royaume-Uni
First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) – Information Rights
Beacon Counselling Trust v The Information Commissioner & Anor
Introduction to the Appeal 1. On 23 May 2024, the Appellant submitted a request (“the Request”) to the Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (“the Trust”) for copies of correspondence making reference to the Appellant, which had been sent to or from a named person at the Trust from 1 February 2023 to the date of the Request. 2....
Royaume-Uni
High Court (Chancery Division)
Kalaivani Jaipal Kirishani v George Major
Sir Anthony Mann : Introduction 1. This is an appeal from an order of HHJ Gerald sitting in the County Court at Central London dated 23rd December 2024 in which he dismissed two of three claims made by Ms Kirishana as claimant against her former cohabitee Mr Major. The claims were for a contribution to household and other domestic expenses,...
Royaume-Uni
High Court (Insolvency and Companies List)
Joanna Rich v JDDR Capital Limited
ICC JUDGE AGNELLO KC: Introduction 1. This is the judgment in relation to an application to set aside a statutory demand against Mrs Joanna Rich (Mrs Rich) and a petition against Mr Clive Rich (Mr Rich) relating to the same debt claimed under a personal guarantee provided by them in relation to a loan granted to LawBit Limited (Lawbit). Mr...