UK High Court Praises Leigh Day for Enforcing Court Embargo

• The UK High Court praised Leigh Day for reinforcing court embargoes following a client incident.
• A media release issued by the Badger Trust minutes before a JR decision was deemed a breach of the court embargo.
• Justice Michael Fordham emphasized the importance of maintaining confidentiality and warned against breaching court orders.
• The judge commended Leigh Day's efforts to explain the difference between a court and press embargo.

"It is significant. It can also be a contempt of court. The court will always investigate it fully, and treat it very seriously," Fordham wrote in the ruling.

In a recent judgment, Justice Michael Fordham emphasized the significance of court embargoes in preventing contempt of court. The judge's words serve as a reminder to lawyers and parties involved in litigation that breaching confidentiality can have serious consequences. Leigh Day's reinforcement of court embargoes was praised by the High Court for its efforts to educate clients on the importance of maintaining confidentiality. This incident highlights the recurring problem of miscommunication between parties, which can lead to breaches of court orders.

The Badger Trust, represented by Leigh Day, had issued a media release minutes before the scheduled hand-down of a JR decision. However, this move was deemed a breach of the court embargo, which is fundamentally different from a press embargo. Carol Day, senior environmental solicitor at Leigh Day, had cautioned against releasing press statements to journalists before the ruling was officially handed down. The firm's efforts to explain the difference between a court and press embargo were commended by Justice Fordham.

Justice Fordham made it clear that disclosing information regarding the result or content of a judgment before receiving the final handed-down ruling constitutes a breach of duty imposed by the court. This can lead to serious consequences, including costs being awarded against parties who breach confidentiality. In this case, Badger Trust agreed to cover the £900 in costs incurred by the secretary of state for environment, food, and rural affairs. The judge's emphasis on treating such breaches seriously serves as a warning to all parties involved in litigation.

Lawyers should take note that the UK High Court has emphasized the importance of enforcing court embargoes to prevent contempt of court, which can result in serious consequences, including costs being awarded against parties who breach confidentiality.

Source: Original reporting via Law Society Gazette