Laws governing the release of court material to non-parties in civil cases post Cape Intermediate are clear, but has the decision moved transparency laws forward for family proceedings? David Burrows reports
The Supreme Court’s decision in Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd v Dring (Asbestos Victims Support Groups Forum UK) [2019] UKSC 38, [2019] All ER (D) 161 (Jul) is important in the development of attempts by individuals who are not parties to litigation (‘non-parties’) to find out about a case by having access to court documents.
The news story in NLJ (‘Victory for open justice’, NLJ online, 31 July 2019) reports that the Supreme Court said of the case: ‘The default position should be to grant access to documents placed before a judge and referred to by a party at trial unless there was a good reason not to do so. It should not be limited by what the judge has chosen to read.’ The court did say that, but only because they were quoting what the Asbestos Victims Forum were asking for. It
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=e3c4b2f1_1)
