Secretary of State for Business and Trade v Alexander David Greensill
[2024] EWHC 1803 (Ch)
WH Holding Limited v E20 Stadium LLP
20 March 2024
[2024] EWHC 817 (Comm)
High Court
A company asked the court to keep its court documents secret. The judge agreed to hide some financial details to protect privacy, but otherwise kept the documents public, as required by open justice rules. The judge refused permission to appeal this decision.
Key Facts
- •WH Holding Limited applied for an order preventing non-parties from accessing their statement of case without further order.
- •The defendant did not oppose the application.
- •The proceedings were Part 8 proceedings.
- •The claimant argued that the statement of case contained confidential information.
- •The court considered the open justice principle and CPR r.5.4C.
- •The court considered the case of R (Guardian News and Media Limited) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court [2012] EWCA Civ 420.
- •The court also considered Cider of Sweden Limited v HMRC [2022] UKFTT 76 (TC).
Legal Principles
Open Justice Principle
R (Guardian News and Media Limited) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court [2012] EWCA Civ 420
CPR r.5.4C(1): General rule on non-party access to statements of case.
CPR r.5.4C(1)
CPR r.5.4C(4): Court's power to make orders restricting access to statements of case.
CPR r.5.4C(4)
CPR r.39.2(3)(a)-(g): Factors relevant to considering restrictions on access to documents.
CPR r.39.2(3)(a)-(g)
Necessity and Proportionality
Judge's interpretation of CPR 5.4C
Outcomes
The court ordered redaction of specific financial amounts in paragraphs 6, 7, 8, 12 and 14(a) of the 'details of claim' document.
Balancing the interests of individuals in keeping their financial information confidential with the public interest in open justice.
Permission to appeal was refused.
No realistic prospect of the Court of Appeal reaching a different conclusion; the arguments raised were not considered strong enough to justify an appeal.