There is no legal basis for a judicial order allowing only the representing attorney, but not his client, to inspect documents obtained in the course of a seizure and possibly containing trade secrets of the party subject to such seizure.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Translation by Leo Lahme.
For a case note on this decision together with the Japanese IP High Court decision “In Camera Proceedings/FOMA” by Christopher Heath, see this issue of IIC at doi:10.1007/s40319-017-0649-z.
About this article
Cite this article
Code of Civil Procedure, Sec. 145. “KCM v. Viel”. IIC 48, 977–979 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-017-0650-6
- Search order
- Protection of secrecy
- Exclusion of party to inspect documents
- Procedural law
- Trade secrets