Department of Economics Policy & Development of the City of Moscow v Bankers Trust Co & Anor [2003] EWHC 1377 (Comm) (05 June 2003)

Department of Economics Policy & Development of the City of Moscow v Bankers Trust Co & Anor [2003] EWHC 1377 (Comm) (05 June 2003)

The judgment following a private arbitration hearing should remain private and not be published generally, due to the highly sensitive political and commercial nature of the arbitration, the parties' agreement for privacy, and the policy underlying CPR 62.10, which supports privacy in arbitration claims unless compelling reasons for publication exist.

Citation
[2003] EWHC 1377 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Department of Economics Policy & Development of the City of Moscow; 1st Defendant: Bankers Trust Company; 2nd Defendant: International Industrial Bank
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 June 2003
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Claim Under Section 68 Arbitration Act 1996 / Post Judgment Hearing on Publication/privacy of Judgment
Outcome
Judgment to remain private; not available for general publication.
Legal Topics
Privacy of Arbitration Proceedings, Publication of Judgments, Civil Procedure Rules (cpr), Confidentiality in Arbitration, Open Justice
Arbitration Civil Procedure Confidentiality Privacy of Arbitration Proceedings Publication of Judgments Civil Procedure Rules (cpr) Confidentiality in Arbitration Open Justice

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Department of Economics Policy & Development of the City of Moscow

Claimant

Bankers Trust Company

1st Defendant

International Industrial Bank

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Claim Under Section 68 Arbitration Act 1996 / Post Judgment Hearing on Publication/privacy of Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judgment following a private arbitration hearing should be published or remain private
  2. 2 Effect of CPR 62.10 on privacy and publication of judgments in arbitration claims
  3. 3 Whether any party forfeited right to privacy/confidentiality by disclosure to third parties

Ratio Decidendi

The judgment following a private arbitration hearing should remain private and not be published generally, due to the highly sensitive political and commercial nature of the arbitration, the parties' agreement for privacy, and the policy underlying CPR 62.10, which supports privacy in arbitration claims unless compelling reasons for publication exist.

Court Disposition

Judgment to remain private; not available for general publication.

Orders

  • Earlier judgment to remain private and not published generally.
  • Result of applications and arbitration may be published without reference to judgment content.