GSTS Pathology LLP, R (on the application of) v Revenue & Customs

GSTS Pathology LLP, R (on the application of) v Revenue & Customs

The application to remove or redact commercially sensitive information from the published judgment is refused. The principle of open justice requires publication of the court's full reasoning, including relevant financial and business information, unless compelling reasons justify departure. The information was central or relevant to the court's assessment and had already been referred to in open court. No sufficient justification for redaction was established.

Parties
Claimant: GSTS Pathology LLP; Claimant: Serco Ltd; Claimant: Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust; Defendant: Commissioners for Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Post Judgment Application for Redaction of Published Judgment
Outcome
Application for redaction/refusal to publish certain information dismissed
Legal Topics
Open Justice, Confidentiality in Court Proceedings, Publication of Judgments, Interim Relief
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Open Justice Confidentiality in Court Proceedings Publication of Judgments Interim Relief

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GSTS Pathology LLP

Claimant

Serco Ltd

Claimant

Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust

Claimant

Commissioners for Revenue & Customs

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Post Judgment Application for Redaction of Published Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether commercially sensitive information should be redacted from a published judgment after oral delivery in open court
  2. 2 Whether the principle of open justice requires publication of all reasoning including sensitive information

Ratio Decidendi

The application to remove or redact commercially sensitive information from the published judgment is refused. The principle of open justice requires publication of the court's full reasoning, including relevant financial and business information, unless compelling reasons justify departure. The information was central or relevant to the court's assessment and had already been referred to in open court. No sufficient justification for redaction was established.

Court Disposition

Application for redaction/refusal to publish certain information dismissed

Orders

  • The transcript of the judgment will be published without alteration.