HS2 (High Speed Two Limited) & Anor. v Elliott Cuciurean & Ors.

HS2 (High Speed Two Limited) & Anor. v Elliott Cuciurean & Ors.

The court granted a limited private hearing for consideration of confidential medical information relevant to sanctions, with reporting restrictions in place for that part, but refused to guarantee privacy in advance or restrict attendance to only one claimant. The court emphasised open justice, balancing privacy rights against public interest, and allowed late evidence if served by a specified deadline.

Parties
Claimant: HS2 (High Speed Two Limited); Claimant: Secretary of State for Transport; Defendant: Elliott Cuciurean
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Committal Application for Contempt of Court / Pre Sanctions Judgment
Outcome
Defendant's application granted in part; Claimants' application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Injunctions, Open Justice, Privacy, Reporting Restrictions, Sanctions, Mitigation, Committal Proceedings
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Human Rights Injunctions Open Justice Privacy Reporting Restrictions Sanctions +2 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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HS2 (High Speed Two Limited)

Claimant

Secretary of State for Transport

Claimant

Elliott Cuciurean

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Committal Application for Contempt of Court / Pre Sanctions Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Should part or all of the sanctions hearing be held in private?
  2. 2 Should reporting restrictions be imposed regarding confidential medical information?
  3. 3 Should late evidence be admitted for the defendant?

Ratio Decidendi

The court granted a limited private hearing for consideration of confidential medical information relevant to sanctions, with reporting restrictions in place for that part, but refused to guarantee privacy in advance or restrict attendance to only one claimant. The court emphasised open justice, balancing privacy rights against public interest, and allowed late evidence if served by a specified deadline.

Court Disposition

Defendant's application granted in part; Claimants' application dismissed.

Orders

  • Sanctions hearing to proceed with a private segment for confidential information, attended by all parties.
  • Reporting restrictions imposed for the private segment until its conclusion.