Roddy Bourke and Paula Fearon of McCann Fitzgerald cover an interesting Irish case in this insights piece. They specifically highlight some of the things that can go wrong with discovery.
Of course, the ideal scenario is that nothing goes wrong at all!! But the key to ensuring all goes as planned is preparation and indeed bringing in the experts early on.
From our experience, early involvement of data experts has always been key to an efficient disclosure exercise, particularly on many of the complex data heavy cases that tend to take place in todays digitised world.
We have also seen the advantages of having a subject matter expert or dispute expert involved early on. Not only will this allow the forensic expert to understand the data quickly, but it will also allow the client access to a subject matter expert/ testifying expert who will be able to advise on what documents will be useful at trial. This can help ensure that the collection and review methodology are aligned, and that no one is having to claw around later looking for that vital last piece of evidence.
Parties from whom wide discovery is sought should seek to narrow the scope of the discovery. They can do this in negotiations or in submissions to the court before the order is made. They can also ask the court to narrow the scope of a discovery order if, after commencing their searches and reviews, they identify persuasive reasons to show that the order is too wide and impracticable. However, they may not unjustifiably limit searches and inquiries without reference to the court and the other party.
https://www.mccannfitzgerald.com/knowledge/disputes/high-court-unhappy-with-discovery-shortcuts
unknownx500
