Marlwood Commercial Incorporated v Kozeny & Ors [2004] EWHC 189 (Comm) (09 February 2004)

Marlwood Commercial Incorporated v Kozeny & Ors [2004] EWHC 189 (Comm) (09 February 2004)

The statutory powers of the Serious Fraud Office under section 2 of the Criminal Justice Act 1987 override the implied undertaking and any general public policy in favour of confidentiality of documents disclosed in litigation, except in rare cases where public policy justifies non-disclosure. There are no such exceptional circumstances in this case, so the solicitors must comply with the SFO notices and produce the documents.

Citation
[2004] EWHC 189 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Marlwood Commercial Incorporated; Defendant: Viktor Kozeny; Defendant: Charles Towers-Clark; Defendant: Oily Rock Group Limited; Defendant: Minaret Group Limited; Intervener: Director of the Serious Fraud Office
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 February 2004
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application / Interlocutory Application Regarding Disclosure of Documents to the Serious Fraud Office
Outcome
Applications by the claimants' solicitor and the SFO granted; application by the defendants refused.
Legal Topics
Disclosure of Documents, Implied Undertaking, Public Policy, Serious Fraud Office Powers, International Assistance in Criminal Matters
Civil Procedure Criminal Law International Cooperation Disclosure of Documents Implied Undertaking Public Policy Serious Fraud Office Powers International Assistance in Criminal Matters

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

Parties

Marlwood Commercial Incorporated

Claimant

Viktor Kozeny

Defendant

Charles Towers-Clark

Defendant

Oily Rock Group Limited

Defendant

Minaret Group Limited

Defendant

Director of the Serious Fraud Office

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application / Interlocutory Application Regarding Disclosure of Documents to the Serious Fraud Office

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether solicitors for claimants and defendants must comply with Serious Fraud Office notices to produce documents disclosed in civil proceedings
  2. 2 Whether public policy or the implied undertaking restricts such disclosure under section 2 of the Criminal Justice Act 1987

Ratio Decidendi

The statutory powers of the Serious Fraud Office under section 2 of the Criminal Justice Act 1987 override the implied undertaking and any general public policy in favour of confidentiality of documents disclosed in litigation, except in rare cases where public policy justifies non-disclosure. There are no such exceptional circumstances in this case, so the solicitors must comply with the SFO notices and produce the documents.

Court Disposition

Applications by the claimants' solicitor and the SFO granted; application by the defendants refused.

Orders

  • Permission granted to Mr. Lloyd (claimants' solicitor) to disclose the documents to the Serious Fraud Office in compliance with the notice served on 5 March 2003.
  • Defendants' application to restrain compliance with the SFO notices refused.