ABC v Shulmans LLP

ABC v Shulmans LLP

The claimant's asserted privacy interests, including medical history, contractual confidentiality, and privileged documents, do not justify wide-ranging anonymity or confidentiality orders in professional negligence proceedings, given the overriding principle of open justice and the claimant's voluntary pursuit of litigation. Only limited redaction of medical history is warranted pending further case management.

Parties
Claimant: ABC; Defendant: Shulmans LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Professional Negligence Claim / Ruling on Application for Anonymity and Confidentiality Orders
Outcome
Application dismissed, save for limited interim redaction of medical history from statements of case pending case management.
Legal Topics
Open Justice, Anonymity Orders, Confidentiality in Settlement Agreements, Legal Professional Privilege
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Open Justice Anonymity Orders Confidentiality in Settlement Agreements Legal Professional Privilege

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ABC

Claimant

Shulmans LLP

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Professional Negligence Claim / Ruling on Application for Anonymity and Confidentiality Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to wide-ranging anonymity and confidentiality orders in professional negligence proceedings
  2. 2 Whether Article 8 ECHR rights justify derogation from open justice
  3. 3 Whether contractual confidentiality provisions in a settlement deed justify privacy orders

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's asserted privacy interests, including medical history, contractual confidentiality, and privileged documents, do not justify wide-ranging anonymity or confidentiality orders in professional negligence proceedings, given the overriding principle of open justice and the claimant's voluntary pursuit of litigation. Only limited redaction of medical history is warranted pending further case management.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed, save for limited interim redaction of medical history from statements of case pending case management.

Orders

  • Specific paragraphs relating to the claimant's medical history in the Particulars of Claim and Defence to be redacted temporarily, subject to review at the first case management conference.