The disclosure pilot scheme - a year on
This article looks at the Disclosure Pilot Scheme (the DPS) and how it could affect you and your business.
We are now a year into the DPS which is set to operate for another year in the Business and Property Courts across England & Wales, including the Commercial Court.
Whilst it does not currently apply in the County Court, the DPS is very likely here to stay and will inevitably have a wider application in the future.
What is it?
The DPS is a pilot scheme dealing with disclosure of ‘documents’ in civil proceedings. Disclosure is when both parties make evidence available to the other side which either supports or undermines their case.
Disclosure is a crucial stage in litigation which enables both parties to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the other party’s case and consequently the potential commercial risks going forward.
The DPS commenced on 1 January 2019 for a 2 year period and applies to new and existing proceedings in place of the current disclosure rules. It is contained within Practice Direction 51U of the Civil Procedure Rules.
The DPS implemented a complex set of rules and requires disclosure to start much earlier. It represented a significant shift in the approach to disclosure.
Over the last year, the DPS has been put to the test through the courts and practitioners have been given the opportunity to provide feedback so that it may be fine-tuned before it becomes permanent. The pilot has, for the most part, received a positive reception in its first year.
The objectives of the DPS
- To limit the costs, scale and complexity of the disclosure process. The DPS was reported as “requiring radical cultural change” by parties, their legal representatives and the judiciary.
- To achieve a more efficient and flexible disclosure process tailored to each case.
- To encourage a greater use of technology.
- To ensure key documents are disclosed at an earlier stage. Early disclosure should result in a greater proportion of cases settling once disclosure is completed, avoiding the significant cost of litigation.
How does it affect me and my business?
The DPS obliges parties to be more upfront in the disclosure of key documents at an earlier stage. The DPS is very prescriptive in relation to the practicalities of ensuring that documents are preserved and outlines the specific steps to be undertaken.
The DPS requires “document hold notices” to be sent to ensure that nothing is destroyed. Such notices must be sent to “relevant” employees, former employees, agents and third parties. The net is therefore cast wider than before.
Confirmation that the necessary steps have been taken to preserve documents must be provided to the court and the other side at an early stage. We have seen vigorous enforcement of this obligation by the court over the last year, to ensure compliance with the DPS and to ensure that the risk of destruction is removed and disclosure is uncompromised.
What Constitutes A Document?
The scope of what is considered to be a “document” under the DPS is very broad and is defined as “any record of any description containing information”.
A document takes any form including, but not limited to paper or electronic. It may be held on a computer or on portable devices such as memory sticks or mobile phones or within data bases. It includes all email and other electronic communications such as text messages, web mail, social media, voice-mail, audio or visual recordings.
Note that “document” is not limited to information readily accessible but also extends to information stored on servers and backup systems. It also includes electronic information that has been deleted. It extends to metadata and other embedded data.
Given the prescriptive nature of the duty and the broad scope of the definition of documents, the parties to litigation should carefully record all steps taken in relation to the preservation of documents in case they are required to be produced at a later stage. The obligation is widened by the requirement to contact former employees who had accountability/responsibility for the events that are the subject of the case or for the conduct of proceedings.
In short, there is an extensive obligation to demonstrate that any risk of destruction has been eradicated and that contact has been made with a far wider group of individuals than may have taken place under the old rules. Compliance with the DPS should of course result in earlier settlement and costs being reduced. Conversely, non-compliance leads to criticism by the court and potential cost sanctions.
We shall see what the second year of the DPS brings and whether the conclusions are that it has indeed delivered on its objectives to provide the increased flexibility, efficiency and tailored approach to disclosure that it sought to achieve.
Melania Constable and Jessica Williams write for Pharmacy Business on what the collapse of Testerworld means for community pharmacies
What does the collapse of Testerworld mean for community pharmacies?
Tristram van Lawick
The Sunday Times quotes Tristram van Lawick on investment into country estates
“For overseas buyers the security of the UK property market is seen as a safe investment compared with other parts of the world"
Charles Russell Speechlys announces 24% international revenue growth
Charles Russell Speechlys announces 24% international revenue growth
Chris Haywood writes for The Oath on the impact of Dubai's new Virtual Asset Law on NFTs and the metaverse
A future-ready framework?
EG quotes Emma Preece on the Cine-UK and Cineworld Court of Appeal Covid rent arrears ruling
“This appeal was always going to be an uphill battle for the tenants.”
Charles Russell Speechlys helps defeat bribery prosecution in stunning victory in the Milan Court of Appeal
Charles Russell Speechlys victorious in the Milan Court of Appeal
The Financial Times quotes Darren Bailey on the European Super League and the landmark case at the ECJ
“A win for the clubs may well lead to a far more fragmented football landscape"
The Times quotes Tim Maxwell on replica copies and copyright considerations
The museum could also be wary of allowing the “creation of a new copyright"
And the Award goes to...? First decisions published under pandemic arrears scheme
The first Awards under the binding arbitration scheme introduced by the Commercial Rent (Coronavirus) Act 2022 have been published.
Record number of leading individuals for Charles Russell Speechlys in Chambers HNW 2022
Read about Charles Russell Speechlys' rankings in Chambers High Net Worth 2022
TCC judgment in first post-Grenfell fire safety external wall insulation case.
Art Net quotes Rudy Capildeo on a new legislative change re: criminal damage to memorials
“A political judgement appears to be being placed on the content of the graffiti rather than the act of vandalism itself.”
Elon “Must” complete: Elon Musk’s Twitter Takeover - an “elaborate joke”?
Landed Estates and Heritage Property webinar series
Join our four-part webinar series which delves into all aspects of managing landed estates.
Financial losses arising from Covid and the rise of professional liability
The Grocer quotes Jamie Cartwright on Kellogg’s challenge to rules on HFSS
After Kellogg’s court defeat, are HFSS restrictions inevitable?
Hugh Gunson and Guy Bud write for the Tax Journal on the Court of Appeal’s recent judgment in Hoey
Hoey: you’d better PAYE up
Reforming corporate criminal liability: a balancing act
A look into the published paper on corporate criminal liability by The Law Commission.
A New Era: English Language Litigation in the Kingdom of Bahrain
Over the past six months, there has been a significant shift in domestic litigation in the Kingdom of Bahrain.
Mind your business: Safeguarding your business against loss of mental capacity
Practical considerations to safeguard your business against loss of mental capacity.