![CA-2025-000783 - [2025] EWCA Civ 986](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_Sjvxvlx.png){kind=logo}
Mr Holloway’s request for evidence to be preserved
Mr Holloway’s request for evidence to be preserved
On 4 September 2023 Mr Holloway’s solicitors wrote to Rosenblatt serving the Imaging Order and associated documents and stating that Mr Holloway intended to apply for an order requiring Mold and Mr O’Grady to preserve evidence relating to communications with Mr Hazlehurst. On 5 September 2023 Rosenblatt replied that neither Mold nor Mr O’Grady had any objection to a preservation order being made with respect to Mr O’Grady’s phone. In the event Mr Holloway did not apply for such an order.
As explained below, it subsequently emerged that, according to Mr O’Grady, his phone was stolen from his car, together with other items, on 12 September 2023.
- Heading
- Introduction
- The procedural history
- Mold’s substantive claim
- Mold’s application for a freezing order
- Mr Holloway’s application for an imaging order
- Mr Holloway’s request for evidence to be preserved
- Amended Particulars of Claim and Defences
- Mold and Mr O’Grady’s application for a Norwich Pharmacal order
- Mold’s application for extension of the Freezing Order
- Mr Holloway’s application to search and review the data from Mr Hazlehurst’s phone
- Mr Holloway’s application to vary the Freezing Order
- The Bankers’ Books application
- Mr Jacques’ application to set aside the Freezing Order and the Bankers’ Books Order
- The CYFOR report
- Joinder of the Third to Seventh Defendants
- Developments in the Leeds Proceedings
- The contempt application
- Mr Holloway instructs CCL
- Mr Holloway’s application to set aside the Freezing Order
- The directions hearing
- The judgment
- Conclusions