Seele employed PHD to carry out scaffolding works necessary for Seele’s work in connection with the installation of the main concourse roof at King’s Cross Station. The parties fell into dispute and there were seven adjudications, each started by PHD.

PHD then brought a court application seeking categories of documents in very wide classes. PHD’s director gave evidence that PHD were contemplating commencing a number of further adjudications and court proceedings.

The Judge held that it was an inappropriate case to order pre-action disclosure. The Judge gave the following guidance:

“23. It is important that parties who are adjudicating, who have adjudicated or who are thinking about adjudicating do not see CPR Part 31.16 as some sort of procedural support and a tactical weapon for the purposes of adjudication. This is partly because it is only available when court proceedings are anticipated and partly because the Court should not interfere with the parties' contractual relationship where the contract itself does not as such give either party a right to documentation. The Court should be cautious about granting pre-claim disclosure where the parties are actively pursuing for better or for worse the contractual or statutory adjudication route unless it is clear that notwithstanding this proceedings are anticipated.”