QB-2022-001397 - [2025] EWHC 2193 (KB)

The Guardian’s standard disclosure included 142 audio files, such as recordings of telephone calls with sources created during its investigation. Of those audio files, 60 were provided to Mr Clarke for inspection and 82 were withheld pursuant to section 10 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 (‘the 1981 Act’). In respect of 77 of the audio files, during the course of the investigation the Guardian had produced transcripts using otter.AI, an artificial intelligence software service (‘the contemporaneous transcripts’). All the contemporaneous transcripts were provided for inspection, subject to redactions.

After the exchange of standard disclosure, the Guardian decided to commission professional certified transcripts of the audio files (‘the certified transcripts’), and Wiggin informed TKP they were doing so on 23 October 2024. The Claimant chose not to share the cost of the certified transcripts. The Guardian chose not to use them at trial and so did not share them, or make the necessary redactions for that purpose.

On 27 February 2025, Mr Clarke filed an application for disclosure of all 142 certified transcripts. I heard the application on the second day of the trial, and gave an ex tempore judgment refusing the application the following morning: Clarke v Guardian [2025] EWHC 550 (KB), [1]-[38]. I made clear that the lateness of the application would not have been decisive if a narrower, more focused application had been made, backed up by a compelling explanation as to why this material was necessary for the fair disposal of the liability trial ([36]). However, no narrower application was ever made.