England and Wales Case Law

Roadget Business Pte Ltd & Anor v Whaleco UK Limited

The judge carried out the required balancing exercise and concluded that although the supplier list was confidential, the fair conduct of proceedings required disclosure to in-house lawyers within the outer ring. The Tribunal's decision was not irrational or inadequately reasoned, and there was no real prospect of success in the grounds of appeal advanced by Shein.

Source excerpt

• Confidentiality rings
• Disclosure of documents
• Case management
• Procedural fairness

Read case analysis

CX (A child) (Reporting restrictions order: National security), Re

The High Court allowed anonymised reporting and disclosure in family proceedings involving a child, subject to strict restrictions and redactions, including safeguards for national security.

• Reporting restrictions
• Open justice
• Disclosure of documents
• Children proceedings
• Anonymity orders
• Freedom of expression

Read case analysis

CX (A child), Re (Reporting restrictions order: National security)

CX (A child), Re (Reporting restrictions order: National security) [2026] EWHC 994 (Fam) (29 April 2026)

The High Court allowed anonymised reporting and disclosure of documents from concluded child welfare proceedings, subject to redactions and reporting restrictions protecting privacy and national security.

• Reporting restrictions
• Open justice
• Disclosure of documents
• Children's welfare
• Freedom of expression
• Privacy

Read case analysis

Roadget Business PTE Ltd & Anor v Whaleco UK Ltd

Roadget Business PTE Ltd & Anor v Whaleco UK Ltd [2026] EWCA Civ 221 (05 March 2026)

The Court of Appeal refused permission to appeal against disclosure of a supplier list into the outer confidentiality ring rather than the inner ring.

• Confidentiality rings
• Disclosure of documents
• Case management discretion
• Procedural fairness
• Confidentiality-rings
• Disclosure-of-documents

Read case analysis

The Serendipity Centre Ltd v Tinson

The Serendipity Centre Ltd v Tinson [2026] EWHC 349 (Ch) (20 February 2026)

The High Court held that the claimant had not complied with a specific disclosure order, rejected privilege against a former sole director, and refused variation and extension applications.

• Disclosure of documents
• Legal professional privilege
• Directors' rights
• Solicitor-client file ownership
• Variation of court orders
• Specific-disclosure

Read case analysis

The Serendipity Centre Limited v Susan Tinson

The High Court held that the claimant had not complied with a specific disclosure order, rejected privilege against its former sole director, and refused variation and extension applications.

• Disclosure of documents
• Legal professional privilege
• Company director rights
• Solicitor-client file ownership
• Specific-disclosure
• Legal-professional-privilege

Read case analysis

Ruth Farnsworth v The Information Commissioner

The DLP report was a completed, self-standing document delivered to the council by DLP Planning Ltd as part of a commercial contract. It was not an unfinished or draft document within the meaning of regulation 12(4)(d) EIR. The exception did not apply, and even if it did, there was no public interest in withholding the document. The council and Information Commissioner erred in law by refusing disclosure.

Source excerpt

• Environmental information regulations
• Disclosure of documents
• Exceptions to disclosure
• Interpretation of international treaties

Read case analysis

Persons Identified in Schedule 1 to the Re-Re-Amended Particulars of Claim v Standard Chartered PLC

Persons Identified in Schedule 1 to the Re-Re-Amended Particulars of Claim v Standard Chartered PLC [2025] EWCA Civ 1581 (05 December 2025)

The Court of Appeal dismissed Standard Chartered’s appeal against disclosure orders, holding that withheld documents could be disclosed into a confidentiality ring.

• Disclosure of documents
• Confidentiality obligations
• Foreign law and comity
• Financial services and markets act 2000 (fsma)
• Sanctions compliance
• Regulatory investigations

Read case analysis

Mornington 2000 LLP (t/a Sterilab Services) & Anor v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care

The Intertek Audit Report and associated documents are not protected by without prejudice privilege because they are not themselves statements or offers made in the course of negotiations, are not records of negotiations or admissions, and there was no express or implied agreement between the parties that they would be privileged. The mere fact that the audit was discussed during without prejudice negotiations does not cloak the resulting report with privilege. Privilege cannot be unilaterally imposed, and the objective evidence does not support a finding of agreement.

Source excerpt

• Without prejudice privilege
• Disclosure of documents
• Procurement disputes

Read case analysis

Boris Frederiksen as Trustee in Bankruptcy of Alpha Insurance A/S & Anor v The Commissioners for HMRC

The Tribunal held that disclosure of the documents should be ordered as they are relevant and the Trustees cannot lawfully disclose them without a Tribunal order. The Trustees may redact irrelevant and confidential information to protect third-party privacy. The prohibition on collateral use does not restrict HMRC's statutory right under CRCA 2005 s 17 to use information for any function. The Trustees are permitted to amend their grounds of appeal, as the application was made with reasonable promptness and any prejudice to HMRC is outweighed by the injustice to the Trustees if refused.

Source excerpt

• Insurance premium tax
• Disclosure of documents
• Confidentiality
• Collateral use of disclosed documents
• Amendment of pleadings
• Case management

Read case analysis