Guy Vassall-Adams (instructed by Legal Department, Guardian News & Media Ltd ) for Guardian News & Media Ltd; Jeremy Johnson QC (instructed by DWF LLP ) for the first defendant; the claimant and the second defendant did not appear and were not represented.
The claimant brought a civil claim against three defendants in respect of alleged sexual assaults upon her at an immigration removal centre. The non-party, Guardian News & Media Ltd, applied to the court under CPR r 31.22(1) for a declaration that the claimant might lawfully supply it with the copy of a document disclosed by the first defendant in the course of proceedings; alternatively for permission to have the document supplied by the claimant’s solicitor. The report had not been read aloud, in whole or in part, during the hearing and was not referred to in the skeleton argument or reading list. However, it had been referred to in oral evidence by a witness and exhibited to her witness statement. The first defendant resisted the application and cross-applied for an order under CPR r 31.22(2) prohibiting the claimant and her solicitor from supplying the document.
At para 27 the judge concluded that the document had been “referred to” at a hearing for the purposes of CPR r 31.22(1)(a). At para 29 the judge stated that the observations in GIO Personal Investment Services Ltd v Liverpool and London Steamship Protection and Indemnity Association Ltd [1999] 1 WLR 984, 995 were no longer good law. He applied R (Guardian News and Media Ltd) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court [2013] QB 618 and held that the Guardian had a proper journalistic purpose in seeking to inspect the document. It was to be allowed access to it and was free to publish its contents. The defendant’s cross-application was dismissed.
CPR r 31.22(1)(a)