Airing dirty laundry: when can a hearing be held in private?

When considering whether to pursue a dispute through the Courts, a key consideration – particularly for private clients – is what information could end up in the press.  The general rule is that all hearings will be held in public and key documents from the claim setting out each party’s position (such as the Claim Form, Particulars of Claim and Defence) will be accessible to non-parties.

Given this, if a dispute relates to sensitive information or involves damaging allegations, there is a risk that litigating in public may cause reputational damage.  This was seen recently in the case of Holyoake v Candy, in which allegations made during the public hearing about the Candy brothers’ business dealings and private lives became front page news.  You can apply for a hearing to be held in private, although the threshold is very high.  The rationale for this is that justice should be seen to be done, and that in principle, anyone, including the press, should be able to attend a hearing.

To read the full article click here.

Keep reading

...
OffshoreAlert and IFG Partnership
We are delighted to have been invited to engage in a co-marketing Partnership with one of the industries’ most prestigious conference organisers OffshoreAlert, representing London 2023, Bangkok 2024, Miami 2024 https://www.offshorealert.com/events/ifg/ Event Information  OffshoreAlert London December 4 – 5, 2023 at the Leonardo Royal Hotel London St Paul’s 10 Godliman St., London, United Kingdom Launched
Read
...
Forteith International Symposium on Economic Crime
The International Fraud Group were delighted to sponsor the Cambridge International Symposium on Economic Crime in their 40th Year. Gary Miller, Partner and Head of Asia Desk at Mishcon de Reya LLP convened a panel on “The Impact of Culture on Fraud Investigations” and was joined by Tom Littlechild (Wells Fargo), Tyler Hodgson (The World
Read
...
A presumptuous task: interpreting “see to it” and “demand” guarantees
Guarantees have been described as the lifeblood of international commerce, but determining whether an instrument is a “see to it” or an “on demand” guarantee is not always straightforward. In this article we consider the different approaches taken by the English Commercial Court and Court of Appeal in Shanghai Shipyard Co Ltd v Reignwood International
Read
...
MUR Shipping BV v RTI Ltd: A cautionary contractual tale
In MUR Shipping BV v RTI Ltd, a decision arising in the context of a contract of affreightment, the English Court of Appeal has raised interesting questions as to the lengths commercial parties may be expected to go to in force majeure circumstances. Read the full article on Mishcon.com here.
Read