Newcastle United Football Company Ltd v Football Association Premier League Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 450 (Comm) (05 March 2021)

Newcastle United Football Company Ltd v Football Association Premier League Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 450 (Comm) (05 March 2021)

There is no significant confidential information in the substantive judgment that is not already in the public domain; the expectation of confidentiality is diminished by existing publicity; and there is a public interest in publication of judgments determining s.24 applications. Therefore, the judgment should be published without redaction or anonymisation.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 450 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Newcastle United Football Company Limited; First Defendant: The Football Association Premier League Limited; Second Defendant: Michael Beloff QC; Third Defendant: Lord Neuberger; Fourth Defendant: Lord Dyson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application (arbitration Related) / Judgment on Publication of Substantive Judgment
Outcome
Judgment to be published in full, unredacted and un-anonymised.
Legal Topics
Publication of Judgments, Confidentiality in Arbitration, Open Justice, Redaction and Anonymisation
Arbitration Civil Procedure Publication of Judgments Confidentiality in Arbitration Open Justice Redaction and Anonymisation

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Newcastle United Football Company Limited

Claimant

The Football Association Premier League Limited

First Defendant

Michael Beloff QC

Second Defendant

Lord Neuberger

Third Defendant

Lord Dyson

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application (arbitration Related) / Judgment on Publication of Substantive Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the substantive judgment should be published unredacted and un-anonymised or withheld/redacted/anonymised due to confidentiality concerns in ongoing arbitration

Ratio Decidendi

There is no significant confidential information in the substantive judgment that is not already in the public domain; the expectation of confidentiality is diminished by existing publicity; and there is a public interest in publication of judgments determining s.24 applications. Therefore, the judgment should be published without redaction or anonymisation.

Court Disposition

Judgment to be published in full, unredacted and un-anonymised.

Orders

  • Judgment and substantive judgment to be handed down in unredacted and un-anonymised form unless parties apply for alternative process by specified deadline.
  • Parties to submit draft order for approval by 4 March 2021.