R (Taranissi) v Human Fertilisation & Embryology Authority
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | MR JUSTICE SAUNDERS |
| Judgment Date | 14 January 2009 |
| Neutral Citation | [2009] EWHC 130 (Admin) |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
| Docket Number | CO/9058/2007 |
| Date | 14 January 2009 |
[2009] EWHC 130 (Admin)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
Before: MR JUSTICE SAUNDERS
CO/9058/2007
The Claimant did not appear and was not represented
Mr M Barca (instructed by BBC Litigation Department) appeared on behalf of the Defendant
(Approved by the Court)
: This is an application under CPR 5.4 (2) by the BBC for copies of documents in the court file of an application by Mr Taranissi for permission to seek judicial review of a decision by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. In that judicial review permission hearing, permission had been initially refused on paper but was granted after a fully contested permission hearing before Mr Justice Mitting. Subsequently, it appears that that action was compromised by the parties.
The BBC were not a party to that action but they are the defendants to a libel action brought by Mr Taranissi arising out of a Panorama programme which purported to investigate the activities of Mr Taranissi. In that libel action the BBC have pleaded justification. There are a number of part heard applications going on in front of Mr Justice Eady in relation to the libel action including, I believe, applications for discovery.
The BBC make this application as a non party under CPR5.42. The BBC believe, it seems to me for good reason, that it is likely that the court file of the judicial review proceedings contains documents relevant to the issue of justification in the libel action.
Notice of this application has been served on both Mr Taranissi and the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority as being the parties to the original judicial review hearing. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority do not oppose the application on the basis of undertakings being given by the BBC which they have already indicated they are prepared to give. Mr Taranissi, while indicating through his solicitor in correspondence an intention to oppose the application, has not attended. His solicitor originally asked the BBC to adjourn the case so that counsel who had been involved in the judicial review proceedings could attend this hearing. The BBC were prepared to accommodate a short delay but not one of the length which had been necessary to assure her attendance.
No application to adjourn has been made to the court on that basis by Mr Taranissi and he has not pursued his opposition at this hearing. There was a suggestion made at one stage by Mr Taranissi's solicitor that this application should also be heard by Mr Justice Eady along with the application for the libel action. Whilst superficially attractive, as Mr Justice Eady has a much better knowledge of the issues in the libel action than I, that suggestion has not been pursued before me by Mr Taranissi; and indeed the issues are not the same as to whether to order disclosure in a libel action as to whether to allow inspection of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
ABC Ltd v Y
...information, the principle of open justice is not engaged. This may be putting the point a little too high. In R oao Taranissi v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority [2009] EWHC 130 (Admin) the BBC sought permission to inspect a class of documents on the court file in judicial revie......
-
Mr Graham Dring v Cape Distribution Ltd, Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd Concept 70 Ltd (and Others) and Another (Interested parties)
...4 All ER 498 ABC Ltd v Y [2012] 1 WLR 532 Various Claimants v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2012] 1 WLR 2545 R (Taranissi) v HFEA [2009] EWHC (Admin) 130 Sayers v Smithkline Beecham plc [2007] EWHC 1346 (QB) Dobson v Hastings [1992] Ch. 392 Pfizer Health Ab v Schwarz Pharma Ag [2010] EW......