Hadaway v DB (UK) Bank

Hadaway v DB (UK) Bank

The evidence does not establish that the CPG contains material directly affecting the pleaded issues of causation or contributory negligence; it does not fall within the scope of standard disclosure under CPR 31.6, nor is there sufficient reason for specific disclosure or inspection under CPR 31.12 or CPR 31.19.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Ward Hadaway; Defendant/appellant: DB (UK) Bank
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Disclosure Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Disclosure, Standard Disclosure, Specific Disclosure, Case Management, Inspection of Documents
Civil Procedure Disclosure Standard Disclosure Specific Disclosure Case Management Inspection of Documents

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ward Hadaway

Claimant/respondent

DB (UK) Bank

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Disclosure Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Credit Process Guide (CPG) should be disclosed under standard disclosure obligations per CPR 31.6
  2. 2 Whether specific disclosure or inspection of the CPG should be ordered under CPR 31.12 or CPR 31.19

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence does not establish that the CPG contains material directly affecting the pleaded issues of causation or contributory negligence; it does not fall within the scope of standard disclosure under CPR 31.6, nor is there sufficient reason for specific disclosure or inspection under CPR 31.12 or CPR 31.19.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No order for disclosure or inspection of the Credit Process Guide (CPG)
  • Leave open possibility for renewed application if banking experts require the CPG