ORB a.r.l.; & Ors v Ruhan

ORB a.r.l.; & Ors v Ruhan

The court granted the interim relief sought by the claimants, authorising them and their agents to obtain, preserve, and inspect the specified material, on the basis that there were substantial grounds to believe a third party was attempting to incriminate the claimants and prejudice the main action. The court found the claimants' concerns about criminal liability to be legitimate and that the relief was proportionate and necessary to further the overriding objective. The court was satisfied that the duty of full and frank disclosure had been substantially complied with, and that proceeding without notice and in private was justified at this stage to avoid frustrating the investigation...

Parties
Applicant/claimant: ORB a.r.l.; Applicant/claimant: Roger James Taylor; Applicant/claimant: Nicholas Thomas; Defendant: Andrew Joseph Ruhan
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 December 2015
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Claim / Interlocutory Application for Interim Relief (september 2015 Application), Judgment on Reasons for Ex Parte Orders and Subsequent Directions
Outcome
Interim relief granted; application to be restored for further review.
Legal Topics
Interim Relief, Norwich Pharmacal Orders, Preservation of Evidence, Privilege Against Self Incrimination, Harassment, Fraud, Full and Frank Disclosure
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Interim Relief Norwich Pharmacal Orders Preservation of Evidence Privilege Against Self Incrimination Harassment Fraud +1 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 7 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ORB a.r.l.

Applicant/claimant

Roger James Taylor

Applicant/claimant

Nicholas Thomas

Applicant/claimant

Andrew Joseph Ruhan

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Claim / Interlocutory Application for Interim Relief (september 2015 Application), Judgment on Reasons for Ex Parte Orders and Subsequent Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should grant interim relief to allow claimants to obtain, preserve, and inspect potentially illegal material for the purpose of identifying a wrongdoer and protecting their interests;
  2. 2 Whether the claimants' actions in obtaining such material would expose them to criminal liability;
  3. 3 Whether the application should be heard in private and without notice to the defendant;

Ratio Decidendi

The court granted the interim relief sought by the claimants, authorising them and their agents to obtain, preserve, and inspect the specified material, on the basis that there were substantial grounds to believe a third party was attempting to incriminate the claimants and prejudice the main action. The court found the claimants' concerns about criminal liability to be legitimate and that the relief was proportionate and necessary to further the overriding objective. The court was satisfied that the duty of full and frank disclosure had been substantially complied with, and that proceeding without notice and in private was justified at this stage to avoid frustrating the investigation...

Court Disposition

Interim relief granted; application to be restored for further review.

Orders

  • Application heard in private; court records to be treated as confidential for the time being.
  • Claimants and authorised persons permitted to obtain, preserve, inspect, and experiment with specified material (including potentially illegal images and data) for the purposes of investigation and potential claims.