IG Index Ltd v Cloete (Rev 2)

IG Index Ltd v Cloete (Rev 2)

The Court of Appeal held that IG Index Ltd did use the confidential documents disclosed in the employment tribunal proceedings in breach of CPR 31.22, and permission was required. However, the striking out of the action and the costs orders against IG Index were unjust, as the failure to seek permission was not deliberate or reckless, and retrospective permission should be granted. The High Court has jurisdiction to grant such permission, and implied permission was not given by Singh J.

Parties
Appellant: IG Index Ltd; Respondent: Johannes Cloete
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Use of Disclosed Documents, Confidential Information, Abuse of Process, Retrospective Permission, Implied Undertaking
Employment Law Civil Procedure Use of Disclosed Documents Confidential Information Abuse of Process Retrospective Permission Implied Undertaking

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 6 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

IG Index Ltd

Appellant

Johannes Cloete

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether IG Index Ltd's High Court proceedings constituted an abuse of process due to use of documents disclosed in employment tribunal proceedings without permission under CPR 31.22
  2. 2 Whether retrospective or implied permission to use disclosed documents should be granted
  3. 3 Whether the High Court or employment tribunal has jurisdiction to grant permission under CPR 31.22

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that IG Index Ltd did use the confidential documents disclosed in the employment tribunal proceedings in breach of CPR 31.22, and permission was required. However, the striking out of the action and the costs orders against IG Index were unjust, as the failure to seek permission was not deliberate or reckless, and retrospective permission should be granted. The High Court has jurisdiction to grant such permission, and implied permission was not given by Singh J.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Set aside orders striking out the action as abuse
  • Set aside revocation of costs order against Mr Cloete