Narden Services Ltd v. Inverness Retail And Business Park Ltd & Ors [2005] ScotCS CSOH_62 (17 May 2005)

Narden Services Ltd v. Inverness Retail And Business Park Ltd & Ors [2005] ScotCS CSOH_62 (17 May 2005)

The court held that, notwithstanding the late stage at which the claim of confidentiality and legal professional privilege was made by the first, second and fifth respondents, the court is required by the Human Rights Act 1998 to ensure that Article 8 ECHR rights are protected. The rules of court must be interpreted compatibly with Convention rights, and the court must allow submissions on confidentiality before permitting use or lodging of the disputed documents. Failure to do so could render the court's actions unlawful under section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998.

Citation
[2005] ScotCS CSOH_62
Parties
Petitioner: Narden Services Limited; First Respondent: Inverness Retail and Business Park Limited; Second Respondent: Jaymarke Developments Limited; Third Respondent: Alan Baxter Wilson; Fourth Respondent: Paul Doherty; Fifth Respondent: James Shaw
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
17 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Petition for Rectification of Register of Members / Interlocutory Motion Regarding Recovery of Documents and Confidentiality Claims
Outcome
Motions to open confidential envelopes and to lodge documents continued for submissions on confidentiality; no order made on Note by first, second and fifth respondents; motion to receive late productions also continued.
Legal Topics
Rectification of Register of Members, Commission and Diligence for Recovery of Documents, Legal Professional Privilege, Confidentiality, Article 8 ECHR, Human Rights Act 1998
Civil Procedure Company Law Human Rights Rectification of Register of Members Commission and Diligence for Recovery of Documents Legal Professional Privilege Confidentiality Article 8 ECHR +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 4 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Narden Services Limited

Petitioner

Inverness Retail and Business Park Limited

First Respondent

Jaymarke Developments Limited

Second Respondent

Alan Baxter Wilson

Third Respondent

Paul Doherty

Fourth Respondent

James Shaw

Fifth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition for Rectification of Register of Members / Interlocutory Motion Regarding Recovery of Documents and Confidentiality Claims

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court's procedure for recovery of documents and opening confidential envelopes violated Article 8 ECHR rights of parties claiming privilege/confidentiality
  2. 2 Whether late claims of confidentiality/legal professional privilege must be entertained by the court under the Human Rights Act 1998

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, notwithstanding the late stage at which the claim of confidentiality and legal professional privilege was made by the first, second and fifth respondents, the court is required by the Human Rights Act 1998 to ensure that Article 8 ECHR rights are protected. The rules of court must be interpreted compatibly with Convention rights, and the court must allow submissions on confidentiality before permitting use or lodging of the disputed documents. Failure to do so could render the court's actions unlawful under section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998.

Court Disposition

Motions to open confidential envelopes and to lodge documents continued for submissions on confidentiality; no order made on Note by first, second and fifth respondents; motion to receive late productions also continued.

Orders

  • Continued motion to open confidential envelopes Nos 26 and 27 of process (Ernst & Young documents) for submissions on confidentiality.
  • Continued motion to lodge documents from Paull & Williamsons (Nos 23 and 24 of process) for submissions on confidentiality.