China National Petroleum Corporation and others v Fenwick Elliott, Techint International Construction Company: ChD 31 Jan 2002

In the course of a dispute, the claimants concluded that the respondents had acquired documents of a confidential nature, and sought restoration and disclosure of the source. The solicitors for the respondents suggested that the claimants were in breach of disclosure orders, and that the materials were not privileged, and would be subject to disclosure in any event. It was then alleged that the respondent firm had acted improperly in seeking privileged information from employees of the claimants. It was argued that the sources of the information should be disclosed, but the respondents argued that this might put them at personal risk. In this case there was no evidence of privilege inhering, and no specific allegations, and the respondents claim of privilege attaching to his interviews of witnesses succeeded. The claim had no prospect of success and was struck out.

Judges:

The Vice-Chancellor

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 60 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

FollowedAshworth Security Hospital v MGN Ltd CA 18-Dec-2000
The court can order the identity of a wrongdoer to be revealed where the person against whom the order was sought had become involved in his tortious acts. This might apply even where the acts were unlawful, but fell short of being tortious. There . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction, Intellectual Property, Information, Legal Professions

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167535