Guy Christopher Westgate & Anor v British Airways PLC & Ors
[2024] EWHC 2755 (KB)
Walter Tzvi Soriano v Forensic News LLC & Ors.
10 February 2023
[2023] EWHC 262 (KB)
High Court
Someone is suing someone else in the UK for libel. The defendants want evidence from a US bank, and the UK court said it's okay for them to get it from the US court, even though it might be different from how things are done in the UK. The UK court doesn't think the US action is unfair.
Key Facts
- •Mr. Walter Soriano (Claimant) applied for an anti-suit injunction against Forensic News LLC and Mr. Scott Stedman (Defendants) to restrain a US court application under 28 US Code §1782 (the 1782 Application).
- •The 1782 Application seeks document production from HSBC USA, a correspondent bank involved in transactions related to Soriano's accounts with HSBC UK.
- •Soriano's claim against the defendants involves libel, misuse of private information, data protection, malicious falsehood, and harassment.
- •The defendants are seeking documents potentially relevant to their truth defense and the accuracy of their publications.
- •Soriano argues the 1782 Application is an attempt to circumvent English court procedures and is unduly burdensome.
- •Soriano was not given prior notice of the 1782 Application.
Legal Principles
Jurisdiction to restrain a 1782 Application by injunction is well-established; the relevant test is unconscionability.
Dreymoor Fertilisers Overseas PTE Limited v Eurochem Trading GmbH [2018] EWHC 2267 (Comm) at [59]-[69]
Unconscionable conduct is conduct which is oppressive or vexatious or which interferes with the due process of the court.
South Carolina Insurance Co v Assurantie Maatschappij “De Zeven Provincien” NV [1987] 1 AC 24 (HL) at 41C-D
In a libel action, a defendant's right to discovery is limited to matters relevant to the pleaded case; seeking broader disclosure is impermissible.
Yorkshire Provident Life Assurance Co v Gilbert [1895] 2 QB 148, 152; Taranissi v BBC [2008] EWHC 2486 (QB) at [13]-[14]
Seeking to exercise a right available under US law is not a departure or interference with English court procedure, even if US procedure differs significantly.
South Carolina Insurance at 42E-G
Outcomes
The court refused Soriano's application for an injunction.
The court found the 1782 Application was not oppressive, vexatious, or unconscionable. The court emphasized that the 1782 application did not interfere with the due process of the English court and that the US court could be trusted to address issues of fairness and proportionality.