BCC Trade Credit PTY Limited & Ors v The Secretary of State for Business and Trade & Anor
[2024] EWHC 2039 (Ch)
Secretary of State for Business and Trade v Alexander David Greensill
28 June 2024
[2024] EWHC 1803 (Ch)
High Court
The Financial Times wanted to see documents in a court case against Alexander Greensill. The judge said some parts of the documents, which explained the reasons for the case, should be public so people can understand the case. But other parts stayed private to protect Mr Greensill and let him prepare his defense fairly.
Key Facts
- •Disqualification proceedings were commenced against Alexander Greensill under the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986.
- •The Financial Times applied for access to the Secretary of State's affirmation supporting the claim.
- •The affirmation, including exhibits, totaled over 8,500 pages.
- •A consent order initially restricted access to the affirmation to parties involved.
- •The Financial Times argued for access based on open justice principles and CPR 5.4C(2).
Legal Principles
Open justice
Dring v Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd UKSC 38; R v Sussex Justices, ex parte McCarthy [1924] 1 KB 256
CPR 5.4C
Civil Procedure Rules 5.4C
Use of witness statements
CPR 32.12; Blue v Ashley [2017] 1 WLR 3630; R (Yar) v Secretary of State for Defence [2021] EWHC 3219 (Admin)
Definition of 'statement of case'
CPR 2.3(1)
Insolvent Companies (Disqualification of Unfit Directors) Proceedings Rules 1987, Rule 3
Insolvent Companies (Disqualification of Unfit Directors) Proceedings Rules 1987
Outcomes
The court ordered the release of paragraphs 10-46 of the affirmation (the 'Statement of Matters Determining Unfitness') to the Financial Times.
This section is analogous to a statement of case, and its disclosure is in the public interest to understand the allegations. The court recognized the need for transparency in judicial proceedings.
The court refused to order the release of the rest of the affirmation.
The court balanced the public interest in open justice against the need to protect the parties' rights, particularly Mr. Greensill's right to prepare his defense without premature media exposure of potentially damaging, unproven allegations. The remainder of the affirmation had not yet been used in court proceedings.
Similar Cases
WH Holding Limited v E20 Stadium LLP
[2024] EWHC 817 (Comm)
Director of the Serious Fraud Office v Bluu Solutions Limited & Anor
[2024] EWHC 500 (KB)
Pump Court Chambers Ltd v Gillian Brown (also known as Gillian Goodfield)
[2024] EWHC 2428 (Ch)
Reuben Kirkham v Information Commissioner
[2023] UKFTT 833 (GRC)