Short but snappy post here on the Bristows blog by Anna Cook directing people to read a longer article on IADC here. The original article by Michael Gladstone is well worth a read if you have time too as well as Anna’s overview and commentary.

Here are some of my thoughts:

Local courts are prioritising their viewpoint over other regions regulation. In fact, this happened in one of the cases we were working on. Our client was not allowed to disclose documents from Saudi because of the regulator. The regulator said that the material was sensitive to their sector, but the UK courts said that this wasn’t good enough and threw out the points that relied on disclosure.

I definitely agree with this point mentioned by Anna Cook; “a UK/European litigant faces a further problem because the scope of US discovery is so broad. The breadth of US discovery and the requirements for the preservation of documents can come as a shock. A litigant can be compelled to produce material which is only of indirect relevance to a claim.”

This begs the question… now with the disclosure pilot scheme, which is trying to make UK disclosure even more efficient, is the gap between the UK disclosure process and US larger than ever?

As Anna says, “by contrast, in the European context, necessity is so fundamental to the GDPR it affects all routine record keeping, including the retention and storage of documents"

This also plays nicely into something a few of my colleagues put together here.