Rely on the most comprehensive, up-to-date legal content designed and curated by lawyers for lawyers
Work faster and smarter to improve your drafting productivity without increasing risk
Accelerate the creation and use of high quality and trusted legal documents and forms
Streamline how you manage your legal business with proven tools and processes
Manage risk and compliance in your organisation to reduce your risk profile
Stay up to date and informed with insights from our trusted experts, news and information sources
Access the best content in the industry, effortlessly — confident that your news is trustworthy and up to date.
With over 30 practice areas, we have all bases covered. Find out how we can help
Our trusted tax intelligence solutions, highly-regarded exam training and education materials help guide and tutor Tax professionals
Regulatory, business information and analytics solutions that help professionals make better decisions
A leading provider of software platforms for professional services firms
In-depth analysis, commentary and practical information to help you protect your business
LexisNexis Blogs shed light on topics affecting the legal profession and the issues you're facing
Legal professionals trust us to help navigate change. Find out how we help ensure they exceed expectations
Lex Chat is a LexisNexis current affairs podcast sharing insights on topics for the legal profession
Discuss the latest legal developments, ask questions, and share best practice with other LexisPSL subscribers
On 31 July 2018, it was announced that the CPR Committee (CPRC) has given approval for a two-year disclosure pilot scheme to commence on 1 January 2019. The mandatory pilot scheme, which is subject to ministerial consent to be sought later in 2018, will apply across the Business and Property Courts in the Rolls Building in London and in Bristol, Cardiff, Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle and Liverpool.
The disclosure pilot scheme has arisen following the establishment of a disclosure working group chaired by Lady Justice Gloster, which identified a number of key defects in the current disclosure regime. The working group concluded that ‘wholesale cultural change’ is required to the current disclosure regime which, it said, can only be achieved by the widespread promulgation of a completely new rule (CPR 31) and guidelines on disclosure. The working group made proposals which were subject to consultation until February 2018.
Under the new rules, standard disclosure in its current form will be removed and its replacement will not be regarded as the default form of disclosure. There will generally be a first stage of initial disclosure. Permission for extended disclosure in addition to, or instead of, initial disclosure may be sought. There are five proposed models (A–E) for extended disclosure, including no order for disclosure, limited disclosure, request led search-based disclosure, narrow search-based disclosure and wide search-based disclosure including train of enquiry documents.
Following the receipt of feedback during the consultation period, revisions have been made to the proposals. In particular, the approved, revised version of the rules clarifies the position in relation to adverse documents. This had been identified during the consultation as a key area of concern. Therefore, to be a ‘known adverse document’ (other than privileged documents) a party must be aware of it without undertaking any further search. A company will be aware of such a document if any person, within the company or organisation with accountability or responsibility for the events relating to the case, or conducting proceedings, is aware. Reasonable steps must be taken to check on the position in relation to such persons who have since left the company.
The working group’s proposals also included a requirement to explain ‘with reasonable precision’ the grounds upon which a document is being withheld from production, which would typically be on the grounds of privilege. Concerns were expressed during the consultation that this may be more onerous than the current approach. The revised version of the rules has deleted reference to ‘reasonable precision’ in this context and a claim to privilege may be made in a form that treats such documents as a class.
There have also been revisions clarifying the scope of legal representatives’ disclosure duties and the relevant knowledge in relation to when the duty to preserve documents is triggered.
LexisPSL Dispute Resolution subscribers can read further guidance in Practice Note: Business and Property Courts—Disclosure pilot scheme.
If you are not a subscriber, you can take a free trial here.
Access this article and thousands of others like it free by subscribing to our blog.
Read full article
Already a subscriber? Login
Hoi-Yee specialises in commercial litigation and international
arbitration. She trained and practised at Manches and worked at Rubinstein
Phillips and US firm Chadbourne & Parke. She was a commercial
litigation and international arbitration Professional Support Lawyer at Berwin
Leighton Paisner before joining LexisNexis.
In practice, Hoi-Yee acted in a range of commercial disputes,
including breach of trust and fiduciary duty claims, breach of contract and
fraud claims, shareholder disputes and matters involving cross-border issues.
She also worked on international arbitration proceedings in London and the Far
At LexisNexis, Hoi-Yee works on the Lexis®PSL Arbitration and
Dispute Resolution modules.
0330 161 1234