First Subsea Ltd v Balltec Ltd & Ors
The court refused to order disclosure because the material already elicited in cross-examination suffices for assessing credibility, the loan arrangement's significance does not warrant further disclosure, and fairness does not require additional disclosure during trial.
- Parties
- Claimant: First Subsea Limited; Defendant: Balltec Limited; Defendant: Robert Emmett; Defendant: Richard Taylor; Defendant: Russell Benson; Defendant: Roger Bacon
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 13 March 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Interlocutory Application During Trial
- Outcome
- application refused
- Legal Topics
- Disclosure, Specific Disclosure, Credibility, Fairness
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
First Subsea Limited
Claimant
Balltec Limited
Defendant
Robert Emmett
Defendant
Richard Taylor
Defendant
Russell Benson
Defendant
Roger Bacon
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application During Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should order specific disclosure of documents relating to a commercial loan arrangement during trial
- 2 Whether documents relating to credibility should be disclosed under CPR 31.12
- 3 Whether fairness requires disclosure of all documents relevant to the loan transaction
Ratio Decidendi
The court refused to order disclosure because the material already elicited in cross-examination suffices for assessing credibility, the loan arrangement's significance does not warrant further disclosure, and fairness does not require additional disclosure during trial.
Court Disposition
application refused
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment