ÀÏ˾»úÎçÒ¹¸£Àû

Why devices are potentially important in disclosure

In Pipia v BGEO Group Ltd Mrs Justice Cockerill was dealing with a question of whether a personal mobile phone belonging to a witness who had held a senior executive position in the defendant company could be required to be searched as part of the defendant’s disclosure obligations. She held that it could in the particular circumstances—see Disclosure —the contents of devices—Are any devices exempt from searching?—and explained in the course of her judgment why the contents of devices are seen as potentially valuable sources of information in disputes, particularly in business disputes.

‘I accept that ... WhatsApp, Viber and SMS messages [sent by or to the witness] will likely give the Court an unguarded picture of some of his actions and this may assist as to his intentions. I also accept that that picture may very well be significant, in a case which raises major issues concerning [his] good or bad faith at relevant times and where it appears that the documentary record is not as full as it is in some cases and where