The plaintiff had a cause of action against the defendant and sought discovery of the name of a third party known to the defendant so that that third party could be joined in. ‘In this case the Plaintiffs do not know, and cannot discover, who the persons are who have invaded their rights, and who may be said to have abstracted their property. Their proceedings have come to a deadlock, and it would be a denial of justice if means could not be found in this court to assist the Plaintiffs.’ Discovery can be granted against a person who is not a mere witness to discover, the fact of some wrongdoing being established, who was responsible for it and that it mattered no whether his involvement was innocent and in ignorance of the wrongdoing.
Judges:
Hall VC
Citations:
(1876) 4 Ch D 92, 25 WR 23
Cited by:
Applied – Norwich Pharmacal Co and others v Customs and Excise Commissioners HL 26-Jun-1973
Innocent third Party May still have duty to assist
The plaintiffs sought discovery from the defendants of documents received by them innocently in the exercise of their statutory functions. They sought to identify people who had been importing drugs unlawfully manufactured in breach of their . .
Cited – British Steel Corporation v Granada Television Ltd HL 7-May-1980
The defendant had broadcast a TV programme using material confidential to the plaintiff, who now sought disclosure of the identity of the presumed thief.
Held: (Lord Salmon dissenting) The courts have never recognised a public interest right . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Litigation Practice
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.182796
