Real Estate Opportunities Ltd v Aberdeen Asset Managers Jersey Ltd & Ors [2006] EWHC 3249 (Ch) (15 December 2006)

Real Estate Opportunities Ltd v Aberdeen Asset Managers Jersey Ltd & Ors [2006] EWHC 3249 (Ch) (15 December 2006)

Section 348 does not prohibit disclosure by a secondary recipient of transcripts of interviews with its employees or former employees, insofar as the transcripts contain information already and independently known to the recipient, applying ordinary rules of attribution; only information not previously known must be redacted.

Citation
[2006] EWHC 3249 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Real Estate Opportunities Limited; Defendant: Aberdeen Asset Managers Jersey Limited; Defendant: Aberdeen Asset Managers Limited; Defendant: UBS Limited (formerly UBS Warburg Limited)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 December 2006
Procedural Posture
Application Under CPR 31.19(5) / Interlocutory Application for Inspection of Documents
Outcome
Application granted in part
Legal Topics
Disclosure of Documents, Confidential Information, Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, Redaction, Attribution of Knowledge to Companies
Civil Procedure Financial Regulation Disclosure of Documents Confidential Information Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 Redaction Attribution of Knowledge to Companies

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 2 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Real Estate Opportunities Limited

Claimant

Aberdeen Asset Managers Jersey Limited

Defendant

Aberdeen Asset Managers Limited

Defendant

UBS Limited (formerly UBS Warburg Limited)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application Under CPR 31.19(5) / Interlocutory Application for Inspection of Documents

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 348 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 prohibits inspection of transcripts and documents supplied by the FSA to the defendants
  2. 2 Whether information already known to the defendants is protected by section 348
  3. 3 Whether redaction of documents is required and proportionate under CPR 31.12

Ratio Decidendi

Section 348 does not prohibit disclosure by a secondary recipient of transcripts of interviews with its employees or former employees, insofar as the transcripts contain information already and independently known to the recipient, applying ordinary rules of attribution; only information not previously known must be redacted.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part

Orders

  • Defendants to permit inspection of the documents in issue, subject to redaction of information not previously known to them, in accordance with the principles set out in the judgment.
  • Prior notice to be given to individual interviewees to enable them to raise objections referable to their particular circumstances.