Background
After trying the underlying commercial dispute, HHJ Paul Matthews circulated a confidential draft liability judgment to the parties before its scheduled hand-down. The draft and accompanying email expressly prohibited disclosure of either the judgment or its substance. The claimant’s solicitor also repeatedly warned Oliver Birrell, the claimant’s sole director and shareholder, that he must not disclose the result to anyone.
Before hand-down, Birrell emailed his accountant stating that the claimant had won and that compensation and costs remained to be finalised. He said that he was seeking accounting information about loans made to fund the litigation and had not appreciated that mentioning the result breached the embargo. Once the solicitor learned of the disclosure, he promptly notified counsel and the court; the accountant confirmed that he had not shared the email further. Birrell and his solicitor explained the incident and apologised.
The Court’s Holding
The court held that Birrell breached the embargo by disclosing the judgment’s result to his accountant. A legal embargo prohibits disclosure of the draft judgment or its substance to anyone—including friends, family members, professional advisers, and witnesses—unless the court expressly permits it. A party who believes disclosure is necessary must seek permission or consult counsel before disclosing.
Although an embargo breach remains serious even when it causes no actual harm, the court declined to pursue contempt proceedings. It relied on the disclosure’s limited scope, the absence of onward dissemination or apparent damage, the prompt report to the court, the full explanations and apologies, and Birrell’s mistaken belief that disclosure to obtain information relevant to damages was permissible. The court instead admonished Birrell, while warning that another breach might receive less merciful treatment.
Key Takeaways
- An embargo covers not only the draft judgment itself but also its substance and result.
- Parties may not disclose embargoed information to professional advisers or others without express court permission.
- Potential breaches must be reported promptly, and a lack of damage does not make a breach immaterial.
Why It Matters
The ruling underscores that judicial embargoes are strict legal restrictions, not merely requests to delay publication. A seemingly practical disclosure to an accountant can therefore constitute a breach even when made privately and for litigation-related purposes.
The court also placed lawyers on notice that they should explain embargoes in concrete terms, confirm that clients are willing and able to comply, and withhold the judgment’s contents from clients who cannot do so. Parties needing third-party assistance should seek the court’s consent before revealing any embargoed information.