He has particular experience in dealing with all types of urgent injunctive relief cases including ex parte applications for freezing injunctions, receivership and Anton Piller
orders, Norwich Pharmacal orders and other disclosure orders.
With a career that has already spanned over 21 years, he has experience in Anton Piller
Orders (evidence preservation), Norwich Orders (third party disclosure of records), and Mareva Injunctions (freezing assets); and has acted as trial counsel in numerous commercial litigation and corporate fraud claims.
Early on, the Plaintiffs obtained an Anton Piller order ex parte to enter Defendants' premises to search, inspect, remove, detain and retain certain documents.
In the Court's view, it must resolve the conflict "on the basis that no one has the right to be represented by counsel who has had access to relevant solicitor-client confidences in circumstances where such access ought to have been anticipated and, without great difficulty, avoided and where such counsel has failed to rebut the presumption of a resulting risk of prejudice to the party against whom the Anton Piller order was made.
It came about through a combination of carelessness, overzealousness, failure to focus on the limited purpose of preserving relevant evidence and by an inability to appreciate the potential dangers of Anton Piller orders.
Experience has shown that despite their draconian nature, there is a proper role for Anton Piller orders to ensure that unscrupulous defendants are not able to circumvent the court's processes by, on being forewarned, making relevant evidence disappear.
One of the lower courts correctly found that lawyers who undertake searches under the authority of an Anton Piller order and thereby get hold of relevant confidential information attributable to solicitor-client relationships, bear the burden of showing that there is no real risk that someone will exploit such confidences to Defendant's prejudice.
Finally, there is a third remedy based on the case of Anton Piller K.
For example, when seeking an Anton Piller order, the victim must show that he or she had a business relationship with the defendant and that the defendant is likely to be in possession of documents that can help prove the fraud, such as bank account statements, letters to and from the victim, and internal memos between members of the fraud scheme.
It is probable that only a few people outside the law know what Anton Piller
or Mareva Injunction mean, but that is not the point.
Plaintiff becomes claimant, writ - claim form, pleading - statement of case, statement of claim or points of - particulars of claim, summons or motion - application, interrogatories and further and better particulars - requests for information, discovery - disclosure, leave of the court - permission of the court, minor/infant - child, in camera or in chambers - in private, next friend or guardian ad litern - litigation friend, payment into court - Part 36 payment, subpoena - witness summons, taxation of costs - assessment of costs, taxing master - costs judge, Anton Piller
order - search order, Mareva injunction - freezing injunction, inter partes - on notice, originating summons - alternative procedure, and ex parte - without notice
For further information please contact: Anton Piller
, Marketing Communications of the ESEC Group phone: + 41 (0) 41 749 51 11, Fax: + 41 (0) 41 749 51 77, E-Mail: Anton.