Bank Mellat v HM Treasury

Bank Mellat v HM Treasury

The court declined to make any order endorsing or rejecting the Bank’s sampling approach to disclosure, leaving the issue for trial, as neither party sought an order requiring further disclosure and no practical purpose would be served by a declaration. On redactions, the court found that while disclosure would breach Iranian, Korean, and Turkish law, the evidence of real risk of prosecution or sanction was insufficiently substantiated, especially given the Bank’s and Iranian Government’s interests. The relevance and probative value of unredacted customer information outweighed the asserted risks, so the court ordered disclosure of unredacted documents subject to a confidentiality club,...

Parties
Claimant: Bank Mellat; Defendant: Her Majesty’s Treasury
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 September 2018
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Claim for Damages Under the Human Rights Act / Interlocutory Applications: (1) Sampling Approach to Disclosure, (2) Redactions in Disclosure
Outcome
Applications determined: no order on sampling; order for unredacted disclosure subject to confidentiality club and ciphering as specified.
Legal Topics
Disclosure and Inspection of Documents, Foreign Law Confidentiality, Damages Under Human Rights Act, Sampling in Disclosure, Confidentiality Clubs, International Comity
Civil Procedure Human Rights Banking Law Disclosure and Inspection of Documents Foreign Law Confidentiality Damages Under Human Rights Act Sampling in Disclosure Confidentiality Clubs +1 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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bank Mellat

Claimant

Her Majesty’s Treasury

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Claim for Damages Under the Human Rights Act / Interlocutory Applications: (1) Sampling Approach to Disclosure, (2) Redactions in Disclosure

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is required to search for and disclose all transactional documentation or whether sampling suffices
  2. 2 Whether the claimant can redact customer information from disclosed documents on the basis of foreign (Iranian, Korean, Turkish) law confidentiality obligations

Ratio Decidendi

The court declined to make any order endorsing or rejecting the Bank’s sampling approach to disclosure, leaving the issue for trial, as neither party sought an order requiring further disclosure and no practical purpose would be served by a declaration. On redactions, the court found that while disclosure would breach Iranian, Korean, and Turkish law, the evidence of real risk of prosecution or sanction was insufficiently substantiated, especially given the Bank’s and Iranian Government’s interests. The relevance and probative value of unredacted customer information outweighed the asserted risks, so the court ordered disclosure of unredacted documents subject to a confidentiality club,...

Court Disposition

Applications determined: no order on sampling; order for unredacted disclosure subject to confidentiality club and ciphering as specified.

Orders

  • No order made on the Bank’s application regarding sampling approach to disclosure; issue left for trial judge.
  • Order made requiring the Bank to provide unredacted versions of documents in disclosure, subject to a confidentiality club with named individuals and a list of authorised persons.