Body of evidence
There is a popular aphorism that a dyers hand is always stained by the elements he works with. Likewise, it seems that a solicitor's reputation for probity can easily be tainted by basic flaws in the handling of electronic disclosure. The recurring theme in most cases where solicitors have given inadequate e-disclosure is that the defaulting parties prepared poorly and made nominal efforts to agree e-disclosure parameters with the opposition. This unilateral approach contravenes the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) and has been rejected by the courts. The recent spate of rulings on e-disclosure failures has been covered widely by various interest groups, each promoting parochial solutions. What is missing is a recursive framework for early discussions as required by the CPR.
Electronic evidence is likely to dominate future litigation. John Okonkwo looks at a number factors to be considered when drawing up an efficient e-disclosure framework
This premium content is reserved for
Legal Week Subscribers.
Subscribe today and get 10% off.
A PREMIUM SUBSCRIPTION PROVIDES:
- Trusted insight, news and analysis from the UK and across the globe
- Connections to senior business lawyers within the leading law firms and legal departments
- Unique access to ALM's unrivalled, market-leading reporting in the US and Asia and cutting-edge research, including Legal Week's UK Top 50 and Global 100 rankings
- The Legal Week Daily News Alert, Editor's Highlights, and Breaking News digital newsletters and more, plus a choice of over 70 ALM newsletters
- Optimized access on all of your devices: desktop, tablet and mobile
- Complete access to the site's full archive of more than 56,000 articles
Already have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate enquiries, please contact Paul Reeves on Preeves@alm.com or call on +44 (0) 203 875 0651