IB v CB [2010] EWHC 3815 (QB) (08 November 2010)

IB v CB [2010] EWHC 3815 (QB) (08 November 2010)

Privilege in the claimant's financial adviser's reports was not waived by their confidential submission to the judge for settlement approval, nor did the procedural order require their service as evidence. The defendant's application for disclosure of these reports was refused. Additions to the consent order proposed by the defendant regarding repayment terms, retention of documents, and medical examinations were approved with modifications for fairness and practicality.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 3815
Parties
Claimant: IB; Defendant: CB
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Settlement Approval / Settlement Approval Hearing Before High Court (queen's Bench Division)
Outcome
Settlement approved; defendant's application for disclosure refused; consent order approved with modifications.
Legal Topics
Privilege of Expert Reports, Settlement Approval for Protected Parties, Interpretation of Procedural Orders, Form of Consent Orders, Periodical Payments
Personal Injury Civil Procedure Privilege of Expert Reports Settlement Approval for Protected Parties Interpretation of Procedural Orders Form of Consent Orders Periodical Payments

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

IB

Claimant

CB

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Settlement Approval / Settlement Approval Hearing Before High Court (queen's Bench Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether privilege in expert financial reports sent to the judge for settlement approval is waived
  2. 2 Whether procedural order required service of financial adviser reports
  3. 3 Appropriate form and content of consent order in personal injury settlement

Ratio Decidendi

Privilege in the claimant's financial adviser's reports was not waived by their confidential submission to the judge for settlement approval, nor did the procedural order require their service as evidence. The defendant's application for disclosure of these reports was refused. Additions to the consent order proposed by the defendant regarding repayment terms, retention of documents, and medical examinations were approved with modifications for fairness and practicality.

Court Disposition

Settlement approved; defendant's application for disclosure refused; consent order approved with modifications.

Orders

  • Defendant's application for disclosure of financial adviser reports refused.
  • Consent order to include provision for repayment with interest after six months from claimant's death.