Yesim Kul & Ors v DWF Law LLP

Yesim Kul & Ors v DWF Law LLP

Disclosure requests were refused as documents sought were either privileged or irrelevant to pleaded issues; defendant's re-amendment allowed as it clarified factual context without introducing new issues; exclusion of witness statement sections granted where content was legal argument, irrelevant allegations, or inadmissible expert opinion, to ensure trial remains focused on pleaded issues and proportionate.

Parties
Claimant: Yesim Kul; Claimant: Rohat Mahir (by litigation friend Mahmut Mahir); Claimant: Mahmut Mahir; Defendant: DWF Law LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Applications—specific Disclosure, Amendment of Defence, Exclusion of Witness Statement Sections
Outcome
Claimants' application for specific disclosure dismissed; defendant's application to re-amend defence granted; defendant's application to exclude parts of Gadd statement partly granted.
Legal Topics
GDPR Compliance, Legal Professional Privilege, Disclosure, Witness Statement Admissibility
Data Protection Civil Procedure GDPR Compliance Legal Professional Privilege Disclosure Witness Statement Admissibility

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yesim Kul

Claimant

Rohat Mahir (by litigation friend Mahmut Mahir)

Claimant

Mahmut Mahir

Claimant

DWF Law LLP

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Applications—specific Disclosure, Amendment of Defence, Exclusion of Witness Statement Sections

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's processing of claimants' personal data breached GDPR provisions
  2. 2 Whether communications and documents sought are privileged and/or relevant
  3. 3 Whether defendant should be permitted to re-amend its defence

Ratio Decidendi

Disclosure requests were refused as documents sought were either privileged or irrelevant to pleaded issues; defendant's re-amendment allowed as it clarified factual context without introducing new issues; exclusion of witness statement sections granted where content was legal argument, irrelevant allegations, or inadmissible expert opinion, to ensure trial remains focused on pleaded issues and proportionate.

Court Disposition

Claimants' application for specific disclosure dismissed; defendant's application to re-amend defence granted; defendant's application to exclude parts of Gadd statement partly granted.

Orders

  • Claimants' application for specific disclosure refused.
  • Defendant permitted to re-amend defence as proposed.