Talk:Anton Piller order

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Note that it does not seem settled whether Pillar or Piller is the correct spelling -- a cursory Google search shows a 3 - 1 preference for the 'er' spelling. Arwel 18:44, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC) I agree. While Pillar is often used in recent "internet news coverage", it has also appeared in documents at sites such as the UK Patents Office. Could be due to spell-check software? Zigger 19:06, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC) Well I saw it in newspapers years ago with "ar" spelling, which is why I originally wrote the article like that! Arwel 19:29, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Although the above comments are a bit old, to clarify - the case name is reported with the 'Piller' spelling, so that is what should be used, irrespective of whether the party name was spelt the other way. SM247My Talk 03:25, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There's no doubt about the name of the party, you can see the company listed on a who's who in European Business website. The report is quite clear as to the name of the party too. Francis Davey 20:09, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Three step test[edit]

Wasn't the three step test set out by Lord Denning MR, not Omrod? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Will.S (talk • contribs).

Denning MR said: "It seems to me that such an Order can be made by a Judge ex parte, but it should only be made where it is essential that the plaintiff should have inspection so that justice can be done between the parties: and when, if the defendant were forewarned, there is a grave danger that vital evidence will be destroyed, the papers will be burnt or lost or hidden, or taken beyond the jurisdiction, and so the ends of justice be defeated: and when the inspection would do no real harm to the defendant or his case."

and Ormrod LJ said: "There are three essential pre-conditions for the making of such an Order, in my judgment. First, there must be an extremely strong prima facie case. Secondly, the damage, potential or actual, must be very serious for the applicant. Thirdly, there must be clear evidence that the defendants have in their possession incriminating documents or things, and that there is a real possibility that they may destroy such material before any application inter partes can be made."

So they did cover similar ground but I think Ormrod LJ is correctly identified as the author of the '3 steps' as such.Tedmarynicz (talk) 23:20, 1 July 2013 (UTC) [1][reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1975/12.html

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Anton Piller order. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:54, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Anton Piller order. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:47, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Anton_Piller_order&oldid=1198830177"