Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance & Anor v Kroll Advisory Ltd [2024] EWHC 1255 (Comm) (26 April 2024)

Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance & Anor v Kroll Advisory Ltd [2024] EWHC 1255 (Comm) (26 April 2024)

The court held that the four categories of documents sought were capable of being relevant to the issues in dispute, may well support the claimants' case, and were necessary as there was no other means of obtaining them. The application was not premature, and confidentiality concerns could be addressed by the court's order. The order for non-party disclosure was therefore granted.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 1255 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance; Claimant: AXA Insurance Ltd; Defendant: Kroll Advisory Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 April 2024
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application / Application for Non Party Disclosure Under CPR 31.17
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Non Party Disclosure, Professional Indemnity Insurance, Settlement Agreements, Costs Recovery
Civil Procedure Insurance Law Commercial Law Non Party Disclosure Professional Indemnity Insurance Settlement Agreements Costs Recovery

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance

Claimant

AXA Insurance Ltd

Claimant

Kroll Advisory Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application / Application for Non Party Disclosure Under CPR 31.17

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether non-party disclosure should be ordered under CPR 31.17 against former officers of the defendant
  2. 2 Whether the documents sought are likely to support the applicant's case or adversely affect another party's case
  3. 3 Whether production of the documents is necessary to dispose of the claim or save costs

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the four categories of documents sought were capable of being relevant to the issues in dispute, may well support the claimants' case, and were necessary as there was no other means of obtaining them. The application was not premature, and confidentiality concerns could be addressed by the court's order. The order for non-party disclosure was therefore granted.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Non-party disclosure order made against Mr Clark and Mr Whitehouse for four categories of documents (settlement agreements, pleadings, mediation documents, and notes of mediation sessions)
  • Claimants to pay Mr Clark's costs of compliance with the order, with costs to be costs in the case as between claimants and defendants