Shuldham, Re [2012] EWHC 1420 (Ch) (25 May 2012)

The applicant failed to demonstrate that a private hearing or anonymity was necessary rather than merely desirable; the open justice principle prevails absent compelling evidence of necessity.

Citation: [2012] EWHC 1420 (Ch)
Parties: Applicant: Timothy Edward Shuldham; Potential Respondent: Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 25 May 2012
Procedural Posture: Part 8 Claim (application for Private Hearing and Anonymity Order) / Preliminary Application Before Commencement of Substantive Rectification Claim
Outcome: Application dismissed
Legal Topics: Open Justice, Rectification of Instruments, Anonymity Orders, Private Hearings, Inheritance Tax Planning

Civil Procedure Equity and Trusts Property Law Open Justice Rectification of Instruments Anonymity Orders Private Hearings Inheritance Tax Planning

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2

Parties

Timothy Edward Shuldham

Applicant

Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Potential Respondent

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim (application for Private Hearing and Anonymity Order) / Preliminary Application Before Commencement of Substantive Rectification Claim

Legal Issues

1 Whether the rectification claim should be heard in private
2 Whether the parties and subject matter should be anonymised

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to demonstrate that a private hearing or anonymity was necessary rather than merely desirable; the open justice principle prevails absent compelling evidence of necessity.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

No order for private hearing
No order for anonymity