Jersey Judgment

Nautech Servs. v CSS Ltd. [2013] 1 JLR 462 (13 May 2013)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

Plaintiff seeking an Anton Piller order ex parte must make full and frank disclosure, seek the least intrusive order necessary, and ensure all relevant material and authorities are presented to the court.

Court disposition

Guidance on procedural requirements for Anton Piller orders; no final disposition on merits reported.

Orders

  • Application to discharge or vary order to be dealt with promptly; parties to be available at short notice.

02

Material facts

Parties

Nautech Servs.

Plaintiff

CSS Ltd.

Defendant

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Injunction (anton Piller Order) / Ex Parte Application; Application to Discharge or Vary Order

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
Plaintiff seeks an Anton Piller order to protect its interests and prevent destruction of evidence.
Respondent
Respondent may argue for less intrusive alternatives and challenge the necessity and scope of the order.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Jersey Law Reports [2013] 1 JLR 462

    Plaintiff must seek the least draconian order necessary for its protection and make full and frank disclosure, including arguments for and against the application and alternative, less intrusive orders, and put all authorities and material before the court.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

Plaintiff seeking an Anton Piller order ex parte must make full and frank disclosure, seek the least intrusive order necessary, and ensure all relevant material and authorities are presented to the court.

Obiter and limits

  • Applications to discharge or vary an Anton Piller order should be dealt with as soon as possible and parties should be available at short notice.

Court disposition

Guidance on procedural requirements for Anton Piller orders; no final disposition on merits reported.

  • Application to discharge or vary order to be dealt with promptly; parties to be available at short notice.

Source and reliance status

Official court record

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Court record

Judgment

[2013] 1 JLR 462

[ Home ] [ Databases ] [ World Law ] [ Multidatabase Search ] [ Help ] [ Feedback ] [

DONATE ] Jersey Law Reports You are here:

BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Law Reports >> Nautech Servs. v CSS Ltd. [2013] 1 JLR 462 (13 May 2013) URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/JLR/2013/JLR131462.html Cite as: [2013] 1 JLR 462 [ New search ] [ Help ] Nautech Servs. v CSS Ltd. 2013 (1) JLR 462 (13 May 2013) Injunctions-Anton Piller order-circumstances in which made-ex parte application-duties of plaintiff-to seek least draconian order necessary for its protection-to make full and frank disclosure, including arguments for and against application and alternative, less intrusive orders (e.g. for preservation of evidence) and put all authorities and material before court-application to discharge or vary order to be dealt with as soon as possible and parties to be available at short notice The document you wish to view is available to registered users or can be purchased as a PDF. To purchase this document in PDF format or alternatively to Register to purchase membership go to the Jersey Law website via this link: 2013 (1) JLR 462 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/JLR/2013/JLR131462.html

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

No structured authorities are available for this judgment.

Refer to the full judgment and official source for citations that have not yet been extracted.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.