Emmott v Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 184 (12 March 2008)

Emmott v Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 184 (12 March 2008)

The Court of Appeal held that, while confidentiality is a fundamental feature of English arbitration, exceptions exist where disclosure is necessary in the interests of justice, including to prevent foreign courts from being misled by inconsistent positions in parallel proceedings. The court has jurisdiction to permit such disclosure, and the orders of Flaux J were justified on the facts. The appeal was not academic as further disclosure issues could arise.

Citation
[2008] EWCA Civ 184
Parties
Respondent/claimant: John Forster Emmott; Appellant/defendant: Michael Wilson & Partners Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal From High Court (commercial Court) / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Confidentiality in Arbitration, Disclosure of Arbitration Documents, Exceptions to Confidentiality, Jurisdiction of English Courts Over Arbitration Confidentiality, Parallel Proceedings
Arbitration Commercial Law Civil Procedure Confidentiality in Arbitration Disclosure of Arbitration Documents Exceptions to Confidentiality Jurisdiction of English Courts Over Arbitration Confidentiality Parallel Proceedings

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Forster Emmott

Respondent/claimant

Michael Wilson & Partners Limited

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From High Court (commercial Court) / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether English courts have jurisdiction to order disclosure of confidential arbitration documents to non-parties in foreign proceedings
  2. 2 Whether exceptions to confidentiality in arbitration apply where there is risk of misleading foreign courts
  3. 3 Whether the appeal was academic due to prior disclosure of documents

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that, while confidentiality is a fundamental feature of English arbitration, exceptions exist where disclosure is necessary in the interests of justice, including to prevent foreign courts from being misled by inconsistent positions in parallel proceedings. The court has jurisdiction to permit such disclosure, and the orders of Flaux J were justified on the facts. The appeal was not academic as further disclosure issues could arise.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Orders of Flaux J authorising disclosure of specified arbitration documents to parties and courts in New South Wales and the British Virgin Islands affirmed.
  • Permission for further applications regarding disclosure of additional documents reserved to the High Court.