Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd v Dring (Asbestos Victims Support Group)

Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd v Dring (Asbestos Victims Support Group)

The court held that the Master lacked jurisdiction under CPR 5.4C to order non-party access to trial bundles, witness statements, expert reports, skeleton arguments, and transcripts, as these are not part of the 'records of the court'. The court's inherent jurisdiction does not extend to granting non-party access to trial documents simply because they were referred to in court. Access may be granted to skeleton arguments and written submissions used in lieu of oral submissions, and to witness statements and expert reports standing as evidence in chief, but not to exhibits or trial bundles unless necessary for open justice. The appeal was allowed and the Master's order set aside.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Cape Intermediate Holdings Limited; Respondent/applicant: Mr Graham Dring (for and on behalf of The Asbestos Victims Support Group)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Master's order set aside on jurisdictional grounds.
Legal Topics
Open Justice, Non Party Access to Documents, Court's Inherent Jurisdiction, CPR 5.4 C, Confidentiality of Trial Documents
Civil Procedure Access to Court Records Open Justice Non Party Access to Documents Court's Inherent Jurisdiction CPR 5.4 C Confidentiality of Trial 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 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cape Intermediate Holdings Limited

Appellant/defendant

Mr Graham Dring (for and on behalf of The Asbestos Victims Support Group)

Respondent/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction under CPR 5.4C to permit non-party access to trial documents
  2. 2 Scope of the court's inherent jurisdiction to allow access to documents
  3. 3 Proper exercise of discretion in granting access

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Master lacked jurisdiction under CPR 5.4C to order non-party access to trial bundles, witness statements, expert reports, skeleton arguments, and transcripts, as these are not part of the 'records of the court'. The court's inherent jurisdiction does not extend to granting non-party access to trial documents simply because they were referred to in court. Access may be granted to skeleton arguments and written submissions used in lieu of oral submissions, and to witness statements and expert reports standing as evidence in chief, but not to exhibits or trial bundles unless necessary for open justice. The appeal was allowed and the Master's order set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Master's order set aside on jurisdictional grounds.

Orders

  • Order set aside; parties to agree a new order reflecting categories of documents with right of inspection.
  • In default of agreement, written submissions to be made for final order determination.