1 Apr 2021
Given the applicant's identifiable personal interest, the absence of alternative sources, and her representations that she will not publish, the court exercised its discretion to permit limited inspection of relevant parts of the divorce file without copying and subject to a prohibition on publication, while protecting the privacy of primary and third parties.
10 Dec 2018
Kea was granted access because the documents sought had been used and presented in open court at the substantive hearing, had already been accessed by the media, and Kea's purpose—enforcement of a foreign judgment and related proceedings—was a legitimate public purpose that advances the orderly and fair administration of justice; these factors outweighed Cullen Group's general claim of commercial sensitivity, particularly given Cullen had not sought confidentiality orders. Disclosure was conditioned on Kea's undertaking to use the documents only for the English and related proceedings without…
22 Jun 2018
Because the plaintiff acknowledged limited prior disclosure and confidentiality and privacy interests arising from the settlement weighed heavily post-hearing, the court ordered release of the statement of claim and statement of defence but declined a general search of the court file as the broader disclosure would risk confidential settlement terms and undermine orderly administration of justice.
11 Jun 2014
Access to the statement of claim, statement of defence and other pleadings was refused at this pre-hearing stage because, on balancing the r 3.16 factors, publication of contested and untested allegations would be unfair and prejudicial, the pleadings contain commercially confidential and private information that should not be pre-emptively disclosed, and the principle of open justice has limited force prior to substantive hearings; however access to the procedural court minute dated 8 May 2014 was granted because it is a formal court record containing only procedural timetable directions and…
24 Jun 2010
Given the High Court Rules empower the court to limit access to the formal court record and to control access to the court file, and having found that the record contains family matters, commercially sensitive information and untested allegations, the court granted the joint application and ordered restricted access to the specified parts of the formal court record and to the court file (with exceptions for the parties and their counsel and for the judgment already published).