Lewis Silkin are most popular:


within Cannabis & Hemp, Law Practice Management and Privacy topic(s)
in United Kingdom

A pilot is being launched in the Commercial Court
(including the London Circuit Commercial Court) and the Financial
List (Commercial Court and Chancery Division) which will expand the
number of documents accessible to non-parties. The driving motive
behind this change is to advance the principle of open justice. The
pilot will come into force on 1 January 2026 and last until 31
December 2027, with a review after six months. Any proceedings
running during this period (whether new or existing) will be
subject to the pilot.

Which documents are available to non-parties right now?

CPR 5.4C, which provides for the supply of
documents to a non-party from court records, allows a non-party to
access documents filed at court by parties without needing to seek
permission. However, this is limited to public judgments or orders,
and statements of case (but not any attachments or documents filed
or served with them).

‘[A]ny other document’ filed by a party, or
communications with the court, can also be accessed – albeit
only with permission from the court. Pursuant to CPR5.4D, a non-party must file an application
notice identifying the document sought and pay the relevant fee.
The court will grant access if it believes it is in accordance with
the principle of open justice to do so. The factors relevant in
this decision include the significance of the document to the
determination of issues, potential prejudice to the parties, and
any public policy issues that may arise.

Why the change?

The catalyst for reform came from the decision in Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd v Dring [2019]
UKSC38. It was held by the Supreme Court that the
court’s jurisdiction over access to court documents is not
confined only to the express terms of CPR 5.4C. Lady Hale stated
that ‘there can be no doubt at all that the court
rules are not exhaustive of the circumstances in which non-parties
may be given access to court documents’. Rather, courts
have an inherent jurisdiction to allow non-parties to obtain
documents which may be necessary to enable public scrutiny of the
court’s decision-making, and which are critical to the
understanding of the case and the principle of open justice.

In a postscript to the judgment, Lady Hale urged consideration,
by bodies responsible for framing the court rules, of the questions
of principle and practice raised in Cape.

This has resulted in CPR PD 51ZH, which supplements, rather than
replaces, existing rules.

Which documents will be available to non-parties from 1 January
2026?

A wider range of documents will be available to the public for
inspection, without an application having to be made. They will be
accessible through the court filing system (“CE-File”)
after payment of a small fee (normally £11).

The pilot introduces provisions governing documents which enter
the public domain. Unless the court orders otherwise, documents in
the following categories which have been used or referred to at a
hearing in public are “Public Domain Documents” from the
start of the period within which they must be filed:

CPR PD 51ZH, para 8:


skeleton arguments;

written opening submissions;

written closing submissions;

other written submissions provided to a judge and relied
upon in the hearing;

witness statements and affidavits –


including those relied upon as evidence in chief at trial
and those relied upon at a public hearing of an
application;

not including documents appended or annexed to the witness
statement or affidavit;



expert reports, including –


those adduced as evidence in chief at trial and those
relied upon at a public hearing of an application;

(ii) annexes and appendices to expert reports;



any other document or documents critical to the
understanding of the hearing ordered by the judge at the hearing to
be a Public Domain Document;

any documents agreed by the parties to be Public Domain
Documents.

Paragraph 8(g) has the effect of widening the scope of what
could be categorised as a Public Domain Document and could
potentially cause some uncertainty and scope for argument. For
example, a contract which forms the centrepiece of a dispute and
has been referenced extensively throughout a hearing, can be
classed as a Public Domain Document. This provision is intended to
apply only where it is artificial to regard a document as not being
public.

Restriction of access

It must be noted that the pilot only applies to documents which
enter the public domain via a public hearing, and not those which
are conducted in private. Further, reference made in a Public
Domain Document to another document will not automatically make the
other document a Public Domain Document.

A feature of the pilot which will inevitably be of interest to
parties is the ability to ask for a filing modification order
(“FMO”), which gives the court discretion to alter access
to a Public Domain Document. This process is designed to deal with
concerns about making documents publicly available, for example,
where documents contain confidential material. A court can refuse
access to a non-party, allow a document to be edited or redacted
before being made publicly available, extend or amend the filing
period, or waive or restrict the filing requirement. It is
envisaged that circumstances where it would not be appropriate to
make the documents publicly available will be rare.

Key considerations to keep in mind


The disclosure obligation is proactive. The onus will fall on
parties themselves to make sure that all relevant documents have
been filed on the public-facing platform of the CE-File.

As a non-party, there should no longer be any time delay in
accessing documents, or any need to make an application to obtain
them.

A request for an FMO is unlikely to be successful if it is
based only on a mere desire for privacy.

Extra consideration may need to be taken in drafting documents,
as their public accessibility significantly increases the
possibility of reputational impact and the formation of public
opinions.

Although alternative dispute resolution should be considered
throughout the process of litigation, timing is now more key than
ever before. Negotiations prior to trial are crucial in protecting
the privacy of parties, before they become under an obligation to
file documents publicly.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.