• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

New Court Ruling over disclosure of documents in debt cases

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New Court Ruling over disclosure of documents in debt cases

    Saw this in the Times today. I know it relates to small business loans, but could the judges ruling affect all debt cases where the debt company refuse or redact commercially sensitive documents in support of their case?

    Sorry, if I'm breaking any copy write over this article.

    sidley*
    Attached Files
    Tags: None

  • #2
    It would be interesting to see what the judge actually said in his ruling and whether that could apply to all cases of debts.
    COMPLETING AN N180 DIRECTIONS QUESTIONNAIRE (SMALL CLAIMS TRACK) GUIDE

    My posts here are based on my experience of a variety of life events. I have no formal legal training & if in doubt take professional legal advice or contact CAB. If you follow anything I write here you do so at your own risk & I accept no liability for any loss, costs or other outcomes.

    Private messages are disabled as help is only offered publicly. I do not come on here in the evening, at weekends or on public holidays.

    Comment


    • #3
      I have just found the Appeal Judges full reasoning it can be found here:


      http://www.nabcustomersupportgroup.o...montoria--oak-

      This is so far the most interesting part of the Judgement:

      (ii)*The primary attack

      1.The Emanuels’ primary position was more extreme. Through their counsel, the Emanuels contended that Promontoria Oaks failure to produce the Deed of Assignment in its original form meant that the claim had to fail, even if, on the face of it, the documents showed a good chain of title. In written submissions, the point was put thus:

      12. The Emanuels have put in issue the validity and enforceability of the Deed of Assignment They have only agreed to the redacted copy of the Deed being included in the trial bundle without prejudice to that contention.

      13.Promontoria suggest in their pleading that commercial sensitivity/confidentiality reasons have dictated the redactions they have made and they refuse to disclose any further documentation

      14.The simple point here is that it is not good enough, when a challenge is made to the validity of a document, to seek to adduce a heavily redacted copy on grounds of alleged commercial confidentiality (confidential communications has never been a ground for claiming privilege: see commentary in The White Book, Vol 1 at 31.3.36). Furthermore, those grounds are not accepted by the Emanuels, and are not supported by the evidence that Promontoria have served.

      15.The Emanuels are entitled to see the originals of all relevant documents which are challenged, without any redactions, yet Promontoria do not seek to produce such documents as an exhibit to the evidence of Mr Breen [the witness called by Promontoria Oak].

      16. It follows their claim must fall at the first hurdle.

      17.The court could make that determination at the outset or having heard evidence.
      Last edited by sidley; 17th February 2020, 12:43:PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        It certainly seems that it could apply, but in para 59 he basically says how debt purchasers can disclose and still protect commercial sensitivity.

        ...and it is for the disclosing party to come to the court to seek an order protecting confidence whilst ensuring the document is disclosed.
        All that would achieve is they'll make the application and a defendant would be stuck with the cost, if like in this case it looks as though there is some flaw in the assignment chain I'd be more keen to try it.
        COMPLETING AN N180 DIRECTIONS QUESTIONNAIRE (SMALL CLAIMS TRACK) GUIDE

        My posts here are based on my experience of a variety of life events. I have no formal legal training & if in doubt take professional legal advice or contact CAB. If you follow anything I write here you do so at your own risk & I accept no liability for any loss, costs or other outcomes.

        Private messages are disabled as help is only offered publicly. I do not come on here in the evening, at weekends or on public holidays.

        Comment


        • #5
          jaguarsuk


          ...and it is for the disclosing party to come to the court to seek an order protecting confidence whilst ensuring the document is disclosed.[56]

          [56] In competition and intellectual property cases the use of confidentiality rings is prevalent.

          I wonder whether he was referring to the above as a reason for redaction or non disclosure

          Comment

          View our Terms and Conditions

          LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

          If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


          If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
          Working...
          X