Litigation: Discovery channel

James Macdougald sets out the rules on non-party disclosure, clarified in a case brought by the beneficiaries of an employee benefit trust ‘The Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), r31.17 test has two limbs which operate cumulatively. Even where both are satisfied, the court may exercise its discretion not to make an order under the rule.’ The …
This post is only available to members.

Twin Benefits v Meek [2017] EWHC 177 (Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Summer 2017 #168

This was an application by the claimant for an order for disclosure against a non-party under CPR r.31.17. The underlying action concerned a claim by the assignee of rights from the twin minor children of the first defendant (‘the twins’) concerning a compromise of earlier proceedings (‘the compromise’). The claimant alleged that neither the twins nor their mother was consulted about the compromise, and the compromise did not properly take account of the twins’ interests.

In the late 1990s the first defendant established an employee benefit ...

North Shore Ventures Ltd v Anstead Holdings Inc [2012] EWCA Civ 11

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | September 2012 #122

The substantive action concerned a written agreement between North Shore Ventures Limited (North Shore) and Anstead Holdings Inc (Anstead) made in March 2003 (the agreement). In 2008 Anstead’s assets were transferred into trusts of which Mr Fomichev and Mr Peganov (the appellants) and their family members were discretionary beneficiaries (the trusts). On 20 August 2008 North Shore issued a claim against Anstead and the appellants for monies owing under the agreement. On 21 June 2010, Newey J gave judgment against the appellants for sums in excess of $50m. On 9 March 2011, the Court...