Court of Appeal upholds refusal of private trial and confidential statements of case (Global Torch v Apex Global)

Table of contents

• Practical implications
• Court details
• Facts
• The judgment below
• Tracing the history of the principle of open justice
• The common law approach
• The approach under the ECHR
• Is open justice inherently superior to article 8 rights?
• Was there sufficient public interest in maintaining open justice to justify curtailing the appellants' article 8 rights?
• Was Morgan J wrong in his assessment of the balance between open justice and article 10 versus article 8?

More sections of this document available when you sign-in to Lexis+ or register for a free trial.

Article summary

The Court of Appeal upheld the decision of Morgan J refusing to allow a private trial and confidential statements of case in a Companies Act 2006, s 994 petition which involved serious allegations of commercial misconduct. The judgment traces the common law and ECHR approach to the principle of open justice and firmly reiterates the steadfastness of the principle from which only limited derogation is permitted. Concerns as to reputation and embarrassment alone will not suffice; nor can a distinction be drawn between application of the principle at interlocutory or final stage.