Anton Piller KG v Manufacturing Processes Ltd
The court can order a defendant to allow the claimant to search premises and seize evidence, where there is a real risk that it will be destroyed: the search order.
Facts
Anton Piller, a German manufacturer of electric motors and generators, had agents in England, Manufacturing Processes Ltd. Anton Piller discovered that the agents were secretly passing confidential information about its products to its competitors. It feared that, if it gave notice of legal proceedings, the agents would destroy the incriminating documents. It applied, without notice to the defendants, for an order allowing it to enter their premises to inspect and remove the documents.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal granted the order. Lord Denning MR said that such an order should be made only in an extreme case, where there is an extremely strong prima facie case, the potential or actual damage is very serious for the claimant, and there is clear evidence that the defendants have incriminating documents or things in their possession and that there is a real possibility that they may destroy them before an application on notice can be made. The order does not authorise forcible entry, but a defendant who refuses to comply is in contempt of court. Such orders, known as Anton Piller orders, are now called search orders and are governed by section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act 1997.
Related cases on civil justice and procedure
- American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd [1975] AC 396
- Arkin v Borchard Lines Ltd [2005] EWCA Civ 655, [2005] 1 WLR 3055
- Barton v Wright Hassall LLP [2018] UKSC 12, [2018] 1 WLR 1119
- Biguzzi v Rank Leisure plc [1999] 1 WLR 1926
- Callery v Gray [2002] UKHL 28, [2002] 1 WLR 2000
- Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council [2023] EWCA Civ 1416
- Denton v TH White Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 906, [2014] 1 WLR 3926
- Dunnett v Railtrack plc [2002] EWCA Civ 303, [2002] 1 WLR 2434
Studying english legal system? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
