Oxford Polytechnic v Halpin [1993] UKEAT 148_92_1903 (19 March 1993)

Applications concerning use of documents and release from implied undertakings are matters for the High Court, not the Industrial Tribunal; further discovery is inappropriate while proceedings are stayed.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [1993] UKEAT 148_92_1903
Parties: Applicant: Andrew Halpin; Respondent: Oxford Polytechnic
Jurisdiction: United Kingdom
Judgment Date: 19 March 1993
Procedural Posture: Application for Directions / Interlocutory
Outcome: applications refused
Legal Topics: Discovery, Stay of Proceedings, Use of Documents in Collateral Proceedings

Civil Procedure Discovery Stay of Proceedings Use of Documents in Collateral Proceedings

Source-derived case record

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 Party arguments 2

Parties

Andrew Halpin

Applicant

Oxford Polytechnic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Directions / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

1 Whether documents obtained in discovery in Industrial Tribunal proceedings can be used in High Court proceedings
2 Whether release from implied undertaking regarding use of disclosed documents should be granted
3 Whether further discovery by affidavit should be ordered in stayed proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

applications refused

Orders

No order regarding use of documents in High Court proceedings
No order regarding release from implied undertaking

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.