Stiedl v Enyo Law LLP & Ors

Stiedl v Enyo Law LLP & Ors

There is no real risk of prejudice to Mr Stiedl if Enyo Law LLP continues to act for the claimants, as the Tier 1 review was superficial, the relevant documents were not substantively considered or recalled, and the circumstances do not justify the draconian remedy of restraining the solicitors from acting. The appropriate relief is to restrain use of the privileged documents, not to prohibit the firm from acting.

Parties
Claimant: Bjorn Stiedl; Defendant: Enyo Law LLP; Defendant: Addleshaw Goddard LLP; Defendant: The Individual Subscribers to the Innovator and Gentech Technology Schemes Litigation
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 October 2011
Procedural Posture
Application for Injunction in Ongoing Civil Proceedings / Ruling on Application to Restrain Solicitors From Acting
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Solicitor Disqualification, Use of Privileged Documents, Injunctions, Disclosure, Confidential Information
Civil Procedure Legal Professional Privilege Solicitor Disqualification Use of Privileged Documents Injunctions Disclosure Confidential Information

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 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bjorn Stiedl

Claimant

Enyo Law LLP

Defendant

Addleshaw Goddard LLP

Defendant

The Individual Subscribers to the Innovator and Gentech Technology Schemes Litigation

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Injunction in Ongoing Civil Proceedings / Ruling on Application to Restrain Solicitors From Acting

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether solicitors should be restrained from acting due to possession of privileged/confidential documents
  2. 2 Whether there is a real risk of prejudice to the applicant if solicitors continue to act
  3. 3 Appropriate remedy where privileged documents have been reviewed by opposing solicitors without prior solicitor-client relationship

Ratio Decidendi

There is no real risk of prejudice to Mr Stiedl if Enyo Law LLP continues to act for the claimants, as the Tier 1 review was superficial, the relevant documents were not substantively considered or recalled, and the circumstances do not justify the draconian remedy of restraining the solicitors from acting. The appropriate relief is to restrain use of the privileged documents, not to prohibit the firm from acting.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Enyo Law LLP may continue to represent the claimants in the main proceedings.
  • No use of the documents identified as prima facie privileged is to be made in the main proceedings pending further order.