Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
This is an appeal by the appellant ("W") against the decision of the Master, given on 13 th October, 2014, to decline to make certain orders for disclosure against the respondent ("the Commission"). The reasons for declining those orders were set out in the Master's judgment of 23 rd October, 2014, ( U V and W-v-JFSC [2014] JRC 202 ).
The application for discovery was made in the context of an appeal brought by W (and two others) against decisions by the Commission to give certain directions to the appellants and to make public statements relating thereto. Consistent with the judgment of the Master, this judgment is being issued in the same anonymised form so that the identities of the appellants remain confidential until the appeal is determined.
I describe the background, as I understand it to be, taken from the information supplied by the Commission but I make no findings in that respect. As a consequence of the need for anonymisation, the description will be brief. Consistent with the judgment of the Master and the parties, I will refer to the board of commissioners as "the Board" and to those full-time directors and employees of the Commission who are not members of the Board as "the Executive".
A draft of the final report into the Trust Company (in so far as it related to W) was provided to him before being finalised. Thereafter the decision making process in respect of W (as with the Trust Company) followed that set out in the Commission's guidance note of 27 th May, 2009, (and as revised on 5 th August, 2011,) which comprised, following a Preliminary Review, four stages:-
Pursuant to that process, a draft Individual Criticism Paper was prepared by the Executive and disclosed to W for his review and verification of the factual information contained within it. The process culminated in the decision of the Board taken at its Stage 4 second meeting to give directions to W and issue a public statement, against which decision he is now appealing.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.