Gardner Aerospace Holdings Limited & Anor v Antony John Upton

Gardner Aerospace Holdings Limited & Anor v Antony John Upton

Disclosure of Categories 1 and 4 (records of meetings and correspondence with MPs) was ordered as relevant and necessary for fair disposal, with no objection from the parties and no public interest immunity engaged. Disclosure of Category 3 (government assessments) was refused because the material was inherently sensitive, disclosure would likely be injurious to national security and international relations, and the court should defer to the executive's assessment of risk. Partial disclosure or gisting was also refused as it would not satisfy relevance and necessity and could cause unfairness.

Parties
Claimant/applicant: Gardner Aerospace Holdings Limited; Claimant/applicant: Gardner Group Limited; Defendant: Mr Antony John Upton; Respondent: Department for Business and Trade; Respondent: Cabinet Office (Investment Security Unit); Respondent: Ministry of Defence
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Third Party Disclosure Application (cpr Part 31.17) / Interlocutory Application Ruling
Outcome
Application granted in part and refused in part.
Legal Topics
Third Party Disclosure, Public Interest Immunity, National Security and Investment Act 2021, Causation, Proportionality, Judicial Discretion
Civil Procedure Public Law National Security Third Party Disclosure Public Interest Immunity National Security and Investment Act 2021 Causation Proportionality +1 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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gardner Aerospace Holdings Limited

Claimant/applicant

Gardner Group Limited

Claimant/applicant

Mr Antony John Upton

Defendant

Department for Business and Trade

Respondent

Cabinet Office (Investment Security Unit)

Respondent

Ministry of Defence

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Third Party Disclosure Application (cpr Part 31.17) / Interlocutory Application Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether third party disclosure should be ordered against government departments under CPR Part 31.17
  2. 2 Whether disclosure of sensitive national security documents would be injurious to the public interest under s.35(1) Senior Courts Act 1981
  3. 3 Whether the relevance and necessity requirements for third party disclosure are met for each category of documents sought

Ratio Decidendi

Disclosure of Categories 1 and 4 (records of meetings and correspondence with MPs) was ordered as relevant and necessary for fair disposal, with no objection from the parties and no public interest immunity engaged. Disclosure of Category 3 (government assessments) was refused because the material was inherently sensitive, disclosure would likely be injurious to national security and international relations, and the court should defer to the executive's assessment of risk. Partial disclosure or gisting was also refused as it would not satisfy relevance and necessity and could cause unfairness.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part and refused in part.

Orders

  • Disclosure of Categories 1 and 4 documents by the Respondents to the Claimants.
  • No order for disclosure of Category 2 (already disclosed).