Overriding importance of open justice
Against a factual background involving international intrigue, Saudi royalty and corporate in-fighting, the Court of Appeal confirms that the principle of open justice is paramount to the administration of justice in the courts of England and Wales.
The case of Global Torch v Apex concerned two rival corporate shareholders in a company called Fi Call Limited (the company). Members of the Saudi royal family were involved with one of the shareholders (Global) and also with the company. In December 2011 petitions were presented, firstly by Global to its rival (Apex) and secondly by Apex to Global and to members of the Saudi royal family and their advisers, each alleging serious misconduct on the part of the other, both generally in relation to the company and specifically in connection with various international transactions. Perhaps not surprisingly, the case attracted significant media interest and the Guardian newspaper and the Financial Times applied, as interested parties, for copies of court documents. Global argued that the respective allegations of misconduct left the shareholders potentially vulnerable to significant reputational damage and applied for hearings to be held in private, on the grounds that publicity would defeat the object of the hearings and that privacy was necessary in the interests of justice.
Upholding the decision of the judge in the Companies Court, the Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed Global’s request that hearings be conducted in private. The court acknowledged that the law needs to offer a degree of protection so that the full application of the open justice principle does not expose a victim to the very detriment which his cause of action is designed to prevent (akin to a CPR 39.2 (3) (a) scenario), but that was not the case here. The case in question was really concerned with potential reputational damage to the parties…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Walker Morris briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.Register now
Why register to The Lawyer
In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.
Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.
Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.
More relevant to you
To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.
News from Walker Morris
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Walker Morris
Jackson, Denton, Mitchell… anyone involved with civil litigation over the last two years will have heard these names repeatedly and will be aware of their importance to compliance with the new rules.
While a headline glance at the Supreme Court’s judgment in this long-running case might give developers some encouragement a closer look reveals that the issues in play are not quite so straightforward.
Analysis from The Lawyer
Which firms are cutting it in this era of slimline rosters, and who are the GC new brooms making clean sweeps? The Lawyer can reveal all
The law school war shows no signs of ending. But we have, perhaps, reached the end of the beginning.