KB-2025-001228 - [2025] EWHC 2506 (KB)

On 9 April 2025 the Claimants issued the claim form in these proceedings and applied for an interim injunction, which was compromised by a consent order, to ensure that Mr Friend should comply with his fiduciary and contractual obligations. The consent order was signed and approved by Adrian Eardley KC (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) on 15 April 2025. The injunction was obtained and a return date set of 8 July 2025.

However, on 7 July 2025 a consent order was signed and approved by Andrew Kinnier KC, sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court. The order continued the undertakings from Mr Friend until trial. Those directions required that by 4.00 pm on 18 July 2025, each party was to serve and file with the court an electronic documents questionnaire following Practice Direction 31B (“EDQs”); and by 4.00 pm on 15 August 2025, they must provide standard disclosure of documents by list and by category, with simultaneous inspection.

On 18 July 2025, EDQs were exchanged.

The Defendants contend that the Claimants have “dragged their heels” and that disclosure has come in “dribs and drabs”, late, and without their agreement or the consent of the court. The Defendants have attempted to collaborate on disclosure through correspondence. It is said that the Claimants’ approach has caused the Defendants significant difficulty in reviewing disclosure and it is unclear whether disclosure is complete.

The Claimants’ position, as set out in Jones 1, is that they have, in a very compressed timescale, reviewed over 240,000 documents, whilst responding to the Defendants’ requests to provide further disclosure. They contend that they have provided substantial disclosure to the Defendants, notwithstanding that the core issue for the upcoming trial is Mr Friend’s conduct.

The original date for exchange of witness statements was 19 September 2025, though the parties agreed an extension to 26 September 2025.

A Pre-Trial Review (“PTR”) is listed for 3 October 2025.

The principal issue for determination at the upcoming trial is whether the Claimants were entitled to obtain injunctive relief against Mr Friend. Damages and quantum will be addressed at a further trial.