Triumph Controls UK Ltd & Anor v Primus International Holding Co & Ors

Triumph Controls UK Ltd & Anor v Primus International Holding Co & Ors

The claimants' approach to the reduction of folders/file paths was reasonable, proportionate, and sufficiently disclosed, and no further disclosure was ordered on that aspect. However, the approach to the remaining 220,000 documents was neither transparent nor verifiable, and the absence of agreement or adequate explanation for the CAR and sampling process rendered the disclosure inadequate. Therefore, a manual review of a 25% sample of the 220,000 documents was ordered, to be completed within three weeks, with results to be reported to the court.

Parties
Claimant: Triumph Controls UK Limited; Claimant: Triumph Group Acquisitions Corp.; Defendant: Primus International Holding Co.; Defendant: Primus International Inc.; Defendant: Primus International Cayman Co.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Commercial Litigation (breach of Warranty, Disclosure) / Interlocutory Application (disclosure Dispute)
Outcome
Application granted in part; further disclosure ordered only as to a sample of the 220,000 documents.
Legal Topics
Disclosure of Documents, Proportionality in Disclosure, Electronic Disclosure, Computer Assisted Review (car), Sampling in Disclosure
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Disclosure of Documents Proportionality in Disclosure Electronic Disclosure Computer Assisted Review (car) Sampling in Disclosure

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Triumph Controls UK Limited

Claimant

Triumph Group Acquisitions Corp.

Claimant

Primus International Holding Co.

Defendant

Primus International Inc.

Defendant

Primus International Cayman Co.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Litigation (breach of Warranty, Disclosure) / Interlocutory Application (disclosure Dispute)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants' approach to electronic disclosure was reasonable and proportionate
  2. 2 Whether further disclosure of folders/file paths should be ordered
  3. 3 Whether a manual review of the remaining 220,000 documents should be ordered

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants' approach to the reduction of folders/file paths was reasonable, proportionate, and sufficiently disclosed, and no further disclosure was ordered on that aspect. However, the approach to the remaining 220,000 documents was neither transparent nor verifiable, and the absence of agreement or adequate explanation for the CAR and sampling process rendered the disclosure inadequate. Therefore, a manual review of a 25% sample of the 220,000 documents was ordered, to be completed within three weeks, with results to be reported to the court.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; further disclosure ordered only as to a sample of the 220,000 documents.

Orders

  • No further disclosure of folders/file paths required.
  • The parties are to agree a methodology for a manual review of a 25% sample of the 220,000 documents, to be completed within three weeks.