Rawlinson And Hunter Trustees S.A. & Ors v Director of the Serious Fraud Office

Rawlinson And Hunter Trustees S.A. & Ors v Director of the Serious Fraud Office

The appeal was allowed in relation to documents SFO-042290, SFO-038047, SFO-019016, and SFO-032717 because the mistakes in their disclosure were not obvious and/or privilege was not established. The appeal was dismissed in relation to document SFO-016237, as the existence of an unchallenged public interest immunity certificate outweighed the interest in disclosure, and the court was not bound by Al-Fayed to require an obvious mistake for PII documents.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: RAWLINSON and HUNTER TRUSTEES S. A.; Claimant/appellant: VINCENT TCHENGUIZ and others; Defendant/respondent: DIRECTOR of the SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part, dismissed in part
Legal Topics
Legal Professional Privilege, Public Interest Immunity, Inadvertent Disclosure, Use of Privileged Documents
Civil Procedure Evidence Legal Professional Privilege Public Interest Immunity Inadvertent Disclosure Use of Privileged Documents

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

RAWLINSON and HUNTER TRUSTEES S. A.

Claimant/appellant

VINCENT TCHENGUIZ and others

Claimant/appellant

DIRECTOR of the SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether documents disclosed by the SFO were privileged and disclosed by obvious mistake
  2. 2 Whether permission should be granted to use documents disclosed by mistake under CPR 31.20
  3. 3 Whether principles governing inadvertent disclosure of privileged documents apply equally to documents subject to public interest immunity

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed in relation to documents SFO-042290, SFO-038047, SFO-019016, and SFO-032717 because the mistakes in their disclosure were not obvious and/or privilege was not established. The appeal was dismissed in relation to document SFO-016237, as the existence of an unchallenged public interest immunity certificate outweighed the interest in disclosure, and the court was not bound by Al-Fayed to require an obvious mistake for PII documents.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part, dismissed in part

Orders

  • Permission to use documents SFO-042290, SFO-038047, SFO-019016, and SFO-032717 in proceedings granted
  • Permission to use document SFO-016237 in proceedings refused