Vilca & 21 Ors v Xstrata Ltd & Anor [2016] EWHC 389 (QB) (29 February 2016)

Vilca & 21 Ors v Xstrata Ltd & Anor [2016] EWHC 389 (QB) (29 February 2016)

Given the seriousness of the allegations and the potential relevance of the requested documents, the court orders a broader approach to disclosure than the defendants proposed, including additional custodians, search terms, and document categories, subject to proportionality and staged review. The court defers ruling on the 'control issue' pending further clarification from the defendants and related entities. The trial date is vacated as a fair trial cannot proceed until disclosure is complete.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 389
Parties
Claimants: Daniel Alfredo Condori Vilca & 21 Others; First Defendant: Xstrata Limited; Second Defendant: Compania Minera Antapaccay S.A. (formerly Xstrata Tintaya S.A.)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil / Case Management/interlocutory Application Regarding Disclosure
Outcome
Interlocutory orders made; trial date vacated; further directions for disclosure and case management issued.
Legal Topics
Disclosure, E Disclosure, Proportionality, Vicarious Liability, Duty of Care, Case Management, Control of Documents
Civil Procedure Tort Law Human Rights Disclosure E Disclosure Proportionality Vicarious Liability Duty of Care +2 more

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 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Alfredo Condori Vilca & 21 Others

Claimants

Xstrata Limited

First Defendant

Compania Minera Antapaccay S.A. (formerly Xstrata Tintaya S.A.)

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Case Management/interlocutory Application Regarding Disclosure

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants must provide further disclosure of electronic and hard copy documents relevant to the May 2012 protests in Peru.
  2. 2 Whether additional custodians and search terms should be included in the disclosure exercise.
  3. 3 Whether the proportionality principle limits the scope of disclosure given the value of the claim and the costs involved.

Ratio Decidendi

Given the seriousness of the allegations and the potential relevance of the requested documents, the court orders a broader approach to disclosure than the defendants proposed, including additional custodians, search terms, and document categories, subject to proportionality and staged review. The court defers ruling on the 'control issue' pending further clarification from the defendants and related entities. The trial date is vacated as a fair trial cannot proceed until disclosure is complete.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory orders made; trial date vacated; further directions for disclosure and case management issued.

Orders

  • Defendants to conduct further disclosure as specified, including additional custodians and search terms.
  • Parties' IT experts to attempt agreement on methodology for file server searches; if unresolved, court to decide on written submissions.