The Plaintiffs were granted, and acted upon, several ex parte Anton Piller Orders. MNP LLP had been appointed by the Court to assist in the computer forensic search provided for in the Anton Piller Orders; it was not a party to the Action. The Court of Appeal overturned the Orders, prompting several affected parties (the “Applicants”) to seek an organized return of material that had been seized or sourced from seized material. The Applicants sought the return of scanned electronic images held by MNP LLP.

MNP LLP argued, and the Court accepted, that such non-party production was governed by Rule 5.13, as informed by the scope of relevance and materiality defined in Rule 5.2. MNP LLP was ordered to produce the scanned electronic images. The Court found that MNP LLP was entitled to reimbursement for the Costs of production, and indicated that the Plaintiffs were the appropriate parties to bear such expense, but acknowledged that the Rules require the parties requesting production to pay associated Costs.

The Applicants also requested a sealing Order over a portion of the Court record, as contemplated by the series of Rules beginning with 6.28. Justice Shelley was inclined to grant a sealing Order, as the personal and confidential information at issue had only been disclosed as a result of the improperly obtained Orders. However, Her Ladyship required that proof of notice to the media first be provided, as required under Rule 6.32.