ASSN
A
B
C
D
[1]
E
F
G
H
!
it had about the Hong Kong documents.
Mr. Thomas however
pursued an application to see additional documents in the
possession of the Foreign and Commonwealth office. As a matter
of principle, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office were not
prepared to concede that the court was entitled to inspect the
additional documents. For this purpose two certificates, by
the appropriate Minister, were relied on. The first of those
certificates had already been relied on for the purposes of a
previous application for discovery by Mr. Osman. The second
certificate confirmed that the contents of the first certificate
continued to apply. These certificates made similar claims to
public interest immunity as were made in the certificate on
which the Hong Kong Government would, if necessary, have relied.
There was a procedural problem with regard to the
application for discovery against the Foreign and Commonwealth
Office. The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth
Affairs was not a party to the proceedings. As a preliminary
to his application for discovery, Mr. Osman therefore sought an
order that the Secretary of State be added as a respondent.
This application to join the Secretary of State was
misconceived.
Assuming that it can in exceptional
circumstances be appropriate to join a party to proceedings of
this nature purely for the purposes of discovery, this is not a
case in which the court would accede to the application. As
Miss Montgomery contended, the appropriate course would have
been to have issued a summons requiring the
summons requiring the appropriate official
to attend at court so as to produce the documents.
However in
order to enable the court to deal with the matter of principle,
Miss Montgomery was content not to rely upon the procedural
defect. Accordingly the court heard argument and, without
11