A confidentiality regime imposed on pre-action discovery documents that permits inspection by legal representatives and includes liberty to apply to vary the regime is not equivalent to a refusal of pre-action discovery and does not give rise to substantial injustice warranting leave to appeal. Legal representatives should inspect documents under the regime and, if practical difficulties arise, apply to the primary court to vary the regime rather than seeking interlocutory appeal.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.