There was a transcript taken by a shorthand writer.
Held: (Chanell J dissenting) Cozens-Hardy MR said as follows: ‘Now the proceedings in the county court were public. Any one present could listen and take a note of what the witnesses said. The transcript did not involve any such ‘professional knowledge, research and skill’ as Bowen LJ referred to in Lyell v Kennedy. There is no original composition in the document. It is a mere transcript of that which was publici juris. A defendant who has obtained at his own cost a copy of a document, not in his possession, which is not itself privileged, cannot decline to produce the copy, although he obtained it in anticipation of future litigation’ A transcript of a case was ‘publici juris’ (belonging to the public).
Judges:
Cozens-Hardy MR, Buckley LJ, Chanell J
Citations:
[1914] 3 KB 86
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Litigation Practice, Intellectual Property
Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.223345