Rio Tinto Plc v Vale S.A. & Ors [2015] EWHC 1865 (QB) (29 June 2015)

Rio Tinto Plc v Vale S.A. & Ors [2015] EWHC 1865 (QB) (29 June 2015)

The identities of the confidential sources are of marginal relevance to the issues in the US proceedings and are not necessary for the fair resolution of those issues. The serious risks to the sources and the public interest in maintaining confidentiality outweigh any justification for disclosure. The orders are to be varied to permit redaction of information that would identify sources.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 1865
Parties
Claimant: Rio Tinto PLC; Defendant/applicant: Vale S.A.; Respondent: Livingstone and Company Ltd; Respondent: Africa Risk Consulting Ltd; Respondent: Begbies Traynor (Investigations) Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Application to Vary or Set Aside Orders for Evidence Under the Evidence (proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975 / Post Order, Application to Vary or Set Aside
Outcome
Application to vary the orders allowed
Legal Topics
Letters of Request, Hague Convention on Taking of Evidence Abroad, Confidential Sources, Business Intelligence, Limitation Period, Equitable Tolling, Disclosure, Public Policy
Civil Procedure International Judicial Assistance Confidentiality Letters of Request Hague Convention on Taking of Evidence Abroad Confidential Sources Business Intelligence Limitation Period +3 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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rio Tinto PLC

Claimant

Vale S.A.

Defendant/applicant

Livingstone and Company Ltd

Respondent

Africa Risk Consulting Ltd

Respondent

Begbies Traynor (Investigations) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to Vary or Set Aside Orders for Evidence Under the Evidence (proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975 / Post Order, Application to Vary or Set Aside

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondents should be required to disclose the identities of confidential sources in response to a Letter of Request for evidence for US proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the public interest in maintaining confidentiality outweighs the interest in disclosure for the purposes of the foreign proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The identities of the confidential sources are of marginal relevance to the issues in the US proceedings and are not necessary for the fair resolution of those issues. The serious risks to the sources and the public interest in maintaining confidentiality outweigh any justification for disclosure. The orders are to be varied to permit redaction of information that would identify sources.

Court Disposition

Application to vary the orders allowed

Orders

  • Orders varied to make clear that respondents are under no obligation to reveal information identifying individual sources.
  • Documents to be disclosed may be redacted to remove references that would identify sources.