Autonomy, Inc (aka HP Autonomy) & Anor v Hussain [2016] EWHC 3268 (QB) (16 December 2016)

Autonomy, Inc (aka HP Autonomy) & Anor v Hussain [2016] EWHC 3268 (QB) (16 December 2016)

The availability of the Fifth Amendment privilege neutralises any oppression arising from the examination, as Mr Hussain can refuse to answer incriminating questions. The assertion that the examination would be pointless is not made out, as Mr Hussain's stated intention to invoke privilege is not binding and he may answer some questions. The Senior Master erred in concluding that the Fifth Amendment did not neutralise oppression in civil proceedings. There is no breach of Article 6 ECHR as the procedure does not place Mr Hussain at a substantial disadvantage. The appeal is allowed and the order refusing the examination is set aside.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 3268
Parties
Plaintiff: MicroTechnologies, LLC; Defendant and Plaintiff in Counterclaim/appellant: Autonomy, Inc (a/k/a HP Autonomy); Defendant and Plaintiff in Counterclaim/appellant: Autonomy Systems Limited; Non Party/respondent: Mr Sushovan Tareque Hussain
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Senior Master Regarding Application Under Evidence (proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Letters of Request, Privilege Against Self Incrimination, Oppression, Article 6 ECHR, Taking of Evidence Abroad
Civil Procedure International Judicial Assistance Letters of Request Privilege Against Self Incrimination Oppression Article 6 ECHR Taking of Evidence Abroad

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MicroTechnologies, LLC

Plaintiff

Autonomy, Inc (a/k/a HP Autonomy)

Defendant and Plaintiff in Counterclaim/appellant

Autonomy Systems Limited

Defendant and Plaintiff in Counterclaim/appellant

Mr Sushovan Tareque Hussain

Non Party/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Senior Master Regarding Application Under Evidence (proceedings in Other Jurisdictions) Act 1975

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether requiring Mr Hussain to submit to examination under a US letter of request would be oppressive
  2. 2 Whether the privilege against self-incrimination (Fifth Amendment) neutralises any oppression
  3. 3 Whether the examination would be pointless if Mr Hussain invokes privilege for all questions

Ratio Decidendi

The availability of the Fifth Amendment privilege neutralises any oppression arising from the examination, as Mr Hussain can refuse to answer incriminating questions. The assertion that the examination would be pointless is not made out, as Mr Hussain's stated intention to invoke privilege is not binding and he may answer some questions. The Senior Master erred in concluding that the Fifth Amendment did not neutralise oppression in civil proceedings. There is no breach of Article 6 ECHR as the procedure does not place Mr Hussain at a substantial disadvantage. The appeal is allowed and the order refusing the examination is set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of the Senior Master refusing the application for examination of Mr Hussain is set aside
  • Application for examination of Mr Hussain pursuant to the Letter of Request is granted