Amanda Wadey reports on Digicel v Cable & Wireless where the parties were taken to task for failing to agree the ambit of e-disclosure
Electronic disclosure
Refs: Digicel v Cable & Wireless [2008] All ER (D) 226 (Oct)
Facts of the case
Mr Justice Morgan has emphasised the need for parties to work together so that the e-disclosure exercise is as fruitful as it can be.
The parties were in dispute over whether or not the defendant telephone operators had deliberately delayed interconnection with the claimant mobile telephone companies’ networks. The claims are for damages arising out of alleged breach of statutory duty in seven different jurisdictions in the Caribbean. Following disclosure, which included the disclosure of a considerable number of electronic documents, the claimant made an application for specific disclosure of back-up tapes and electronic documents.
Back-up tapes
Refs: CPR PD 31, para 2A; Byers v Illinois State Police 53 Fed R Serve 3d 740 (N D III May 31, 2002); Zubulake v UBS Warburg LLC (2003) 217 F.R.D. 309
The claimants sought restoration of back-up tapes located in three countries
