Compagnie Des Grands Hotels D'Afrique SA v Purdy & Anor

Compagnie Des Grands Hotels D'Afrique SA v Purdy & Anor

The Senior Master did not err in law or principle in refusing to set aside the Deposition Order. The law does not require the elimination of all risk of oppression or an absolute privilege against self-incrimination in respect of foreign proceedings. The protections in place were sufficient to alleviate the risk to a sensible and acceptable degree. The costs order against CGHA was within the generous ambit of the court's discretion, given the seriousness and centrality of the non-disclosure and the fact that Ms Purdy was a non-party witness.

Parties
Applicant / Respondent / Appellant and Cross Appellant: Compagnie des Grands Hôtels d’Afrique S.A.; Appellant and Respondent to Cross Appeal / Respondent: Sarah Purdy; Respondent / Respondent: Maquay Investments Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal (from Senior Master, High Court, Queen's Bench Division) / Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal
Outcome
Both the appeal of Ms Purdy and the cross-appeal of CGHA are dismissed.
Legal Topics
Letters of Request, Privilege Against Self Incrimination, Oppression of Witnesses, Costs Orders, Comity, Hague Convention on Evidence, Article 6 ECHR
Civil Procedure International Judicial Assistance Human Rights Letters of Request Privilege Against Self Incrimination Oppression of Witnesses Costs Orders Comity +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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Compagnie des Grands Hôtels d’Afrique S.A.

Applicant / Respondent / Appellant and Cross Appellant

Sarah Purdy

Appellant and Respondent to Cross Appeal / Respondent

Maquay Investments Limited

Respondent / Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (from Senior Master, High Court, Queen's Bench Division) / Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Senior Master erred in refusing to set aside a deposition order compelling Ms Purdy to give evidence for use in US proceedings, given the risk of oppression and self-incrimination in Morocco.
  2. 2 Whether the costs order against CGHA (applicant) was outside the proper ambit of discretion.

Ratio Decidendi

The Senior Master did not err in law or principle in refusing to set aside the Deposition Order. The law does not require the elimination of all risk of oppression or an absolute privilege against self-incrimination in respect of foreign proceedings. The protections in place were sufficient to alleviate the risk to a sensible and acceptable degree. The costs order against CGHA was within the generous ambit of the court's discretion, given the seriousness and centrality of the non-disclosure and the fact that Ms Purdy was a non-party witness.

Court Disposition

Both the appeal of Ms Purdy and the cross-appeal of CGHA are dismissed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; Deposition Order stands with additional protections.
  • Cross-appeal on costs dismissed; costs order of Senior Master upheld.