0 ratings 0% found this document useful (0 votes) 420 views 3 pages Alterskye V Scott
Subject: Civil procedure
Keywords: Discovery; Food sales; Hotels; Misrepresentation; Offences; Rescission; Sale of land
Summary: Discovery; further and better affidavit of documents
Abstract: It is by no means usual to find in an order for discovery an express undertaking under which the party obtaining discovery is not to use documents for any collateral or ulterior purpose. In general the Civil procedure is to regard as a sufficient protection the implied obligation, under which each party
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content,
claim it here .
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
Carousel Previous Carousel Next
Save Alterskye v Scott For Later Paget
Status: (@ Judicial Consideration or Case History Available
Alterskye v Scott
Chancery Division
01 January 1948
Case Analysis
Where Reported [1948] 1 All E.R. 469; (1948) 92 S.J. 220
Case Digest
Subject: Civil procedure
Keywords: Discovery; Food sales; Hotels;
Misrepresentation; Offences; Rescission; Sale of land
‘Summary: Discovery; further and better affidavit of
documents
Abstract: It is by no means usual to find in an order for
discovery an express undertaking under which the party
obtaining discovery is not to use documents for any collateral
or ulterior purpose. In general the Civil procedure is to
regard as a sufficient protection the implied obligation, under
which each party is, to make no improper use of disclosed
documents. The cases in which undertakings have been
exacted with respect to particular documents did not concern
applications for further and better affidavits of documents,
but concerned the production of particular documents. In
any event, a party relying on the implied obligation not to
make an improper use of documents has his remedy, if he
can substantiate improper use in any particular case. He can
bring that instance of alleged improper use before the court
either in proceedings for contempt, if he considers that it
amounts to contempt of court, or in proceedings to restrain
the conduct complained of. Moreover, on an order fora
further and better affidavit of documents, it is always open
to the party against whom such order is made to say, with
respect to particular documents or a particular class of
documents, that those documents are, for this or that
reason, especially confidential and that he objects to
producing them except on an undertaking by the other party
in whatever form he conceives adequate for his protection.
In an action for rescission of a contract for the purchase of a
hotel and hotel business and for damages for alleged
misrepresentation, the plaintiff applied for a further and
better affidavit of documents. In his particulars of
mistepresentation the plaintiff had alleged that, during the
period for which the defendant had supplied a trading profit
and loss account, he had committed various breaches of the
food regulations, had bought goods at prices above the
permitted prices, had exceeded the permitted prices when he
sold a meal, and had obtained more fuel than he was entitled
to, After the defendant had filed his original affidavit of
documents he received visits and inquiries from
representatives of the Ministry of Food and the police.
Moreover, the defendant alleged that one of the Ministry of
Food officials who visited him was in possession of a copy of
the defendant's affidavit of documents as originally filed. The
defendant now contended that he ought not to be required to
ol Significant Cases
Cited
Cases Citing This
Case
Poge2
make a further and better affidavit of documents except on
an undertaking by the plaintiff that he would not use any of
the documents in the action or any documents disclosed
under the further affidavit of documents for any ulterior or
collateral purpose.
Held, that to require any undertaking of the sort asked for by
the defendant at the present stage would be premature and
would be likely to give rise to difficulty, Williams viPrince of.
Holes Life, ete. Co-SS-E.R, 133 cstinguished, and Hopkinson.
urahles R. 2 Ch. App. 447
distinguished
Judge: Jenkins, J.
Hopkinson ¥ Lord Burghley (1866-67) LR. 2 Ch. App.
447; (CA in Chancery).
Williams ¥ Prince of Wales Life, etc, Co 53 E.R. 133;
Beav, 338; (Ct
Applied by
Distillers Co (Biochemicals) Ltd & Times Newspapers Ltd
[1975] 0.8. 613: [1974] 3 WLR. 728; [1975] 1 ALER. 41;
(1974) 118 S.J. 864; (QBD)
Home Office Harman [1983] 1 A.C. 280; [198212 W.LR.
338; [1982] 1 All E.R, 532; (1982) 1: 136; (HL
Riddick Thames Board Mills [1977] Q.B. 881; [19771 3,
WLR, 63: [19771 3 All E.R. 677; (CA (Civ Div):
Considered by
Church of Scientology of California ¥ Department of Health
and Social Security [1979] 1 W.L.R. 723; [1979] 3 All E.R.
97; (4979) 12. (CA (Civ Div)
Grapha Holding AG V Quebecor Printing (UK) Plc [1996].
E 2 (1996) 1) 19070;
Sybron Corp ¥ Barclays Bank Plc [1985] Ch. 299: [1984] 3
LR, 1055; (1984) 81 L.S.G. 1598; (1984) 128 S.). 799;
© 2008 sweet Maxwell tke
WestlawUK
27 Cert Ce Coe) oe (Ga
