SL Claimants v Tesco Plc

SL Claimants v Tesco Plc

The court refused the SL Claimants’ applications for broader disclosure against Tesco, finding them disproportionate and unnecessary given the extensive disclosure already provided and the agreed disclosure architecture. The court held that privilege in the Majid Note was not lost by limited reference in open court and refused to order its disclosure. The court permitted limited amendments to pleadings regarding impairment, subject to further searches and expert consensus, but struck out unsustainable inferences. The court allowed Letters of Request to be issued for documents held by foreign investment managers, subject to confidentiality safeguards. The trial timetable was extended to 56...

Parties
Claimant: The Persons Identified in Schedule 1 of the Claim Form (the “SL Claimants”); Claimant: Manning & Napier Fund, Inc. and Exeter Trust Company (the “MLB Claimants”); Defendant: Tesco PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil—financial Services/disclosure / Rulings on Applications at Fourth Case Management Conference (cmc4) Pre Trial
Outcome
Applications for broader disclosure by SL Claimants largely refused; privilege in Majid Note upheld; limited amendments to pleadings allowed; Letters of Request granted; trial timetable extended.
Legal Topics
Disclosure Applications, Privilege, Letters of Request, Case Management, Materiality of Misstatements, Expert Evidence, Strike Out Applications
Financial Services Law Civil Procedure Disclosure Disclosure Applications Privilege Letters of Request Case Management Materiality of Misstatements +2 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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Persons Identified in Schedule 1 of the Claim Form (the “SL Claimants”)

Claimant

Manning & Napier Fund, Inc. and Exeter Trust Company (the “MLB Claimants”)

Claimant

Tesco PLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil—financial Services/disclosure / Rulings on Applications at Fourth Case Management Conference (cmc4) Pre Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether further specific disclosure should be ordered against Tesco PLC
  2. 2 Whether privilege in the Majid Note was lost by reference in open court
  3. 3 Whether SL Claimants may amend pleadings to introduce impairment allegations

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused the SL Claimants’ applications for broader disclosure against Tesco, finding them disproportionate and unnecessary given the extensive disclosure already provided and the agreed disclosure architecture. The court held that privilege in the Majid Note was not lost by limited reference in open court and refused to order its disclosure. The court permitted limited amendments to pleadings regarding impairment, subject to further searches and expert consensus, but struck out unsustainable inferences. The court allowed Letters of Request to be issued for documents held by foreign investment managers, subject to confidentiality safeguards. The trial timetable was extended to 56...

Court Disposition

Applications for broader disclosure by SL Claimants largely refused; privilege in Majid Note upheld; limited amendments to pleadings allowed; Letters of Request granted; trial timetable extended.

Orders

  • SL Claimants’ applications for further disclosure against Tesco refused except as specifically directed.
  • Tesco not required to disclose the Majid Note at this stage.