Topalsson GmbH v Rolls-Royce Motorcars Limited & Anor

Topalsson GmbH v Rolls-Royce Motorcars Limited & Anor

The Applicant’s non-disclosure of material facts did not materially mislead the court except for the German criminal complaint, which does not justify refusal but warrants conditions. The Letter of Request is valid, but only the first three requests for software production are proportionate and relevant. The Applicant must pay into court the Respondents’ costs as a condition for compliance.

Parties
Applicant: Topalsson GmbH; First Respondent: Rolls-Royce Motorcars Limited; Second Respondent: Matthew Scott
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside or Vary Order Granting Letter of Request for Evidence Abroad / Post Hearing Judgment
Outcome
Letter of Request granted in modified form, subject to conditions
Legal Topics
Letter of Request, Full and Frank Disclosure, Copyright Infringement, Comity, Protective Orders, Costs Orders
Civil Procedure International Judicial Assistance Copyright Letter of Request Full and Frank Disclosure Copyright Infringement Comity Protective Orders +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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Topalsson GmbH

Applicant

Rolls-Royce Motorcars Limited

First Respondent

Matthew Scott

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside or Vary Order Granting Letter of Request for Evidence Abroad / Post Hearing Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Applicant failed to make full and frank disclosure in obtaining the Letter of Request
  2. 2 Whether the Letter of Request should be set aside or varied
  3. 3 Whether the scope of the Letter of Request is proportionate and relevant

Ratio Decidendi

The Applicant’s non-disclosure of material facts did not materially mislead the court except for the German criminal complaint, which does not justify refusal but warrants conditions. The Letter of Request is valid, but only the first three requests for software production are proportionate and relevant. The Applicant must pay into court the Respondents’ costs as a condition for compliance.

Court Disposition

Letter of Request granted in modified form, subject to conditions

Orders

  • Only Requests 1-3 of Attachment A to the Letter of Request are granted without alteration
  • Disclosure to be subject to an appropriate Protective Order