Bca trading predictive coding
BLP wins BCA battle in first predictive coding High Court trial. Berwin Leighton Paisner (BLP) has defeated a claim against client BCA Trading after using predictive coding technology in the High Court for the first time. Predictive coding—the future post BCA Trading Send to Email address * Open Help options for Email Address. You can send the message to up to 4 other recipients. Separate each address with a semi-colon (;) Example: name1@company.com; name2@organisation.com From (your details) Name * Email address * Subject Brown v BCA Trading: Court approves use of predictive coding where one party objected. "Predictive coding" (also known as technology, or computer, assisted review), is a method whereby software analyses documents and "scores" them for relevance, and thereby reduces both the time and costs needed to complete an electronic disclosure exercise. In the case of David Brown v BCA Trading, the Court has approved the use of predictive coding by the Defendant despite this being strongly objected to by the Claimant. English litigation involves a process known as “disclosure” by which all parties are obliged to locate all documents relevant to the proceedings in their possession and provide them (subject to a number of exceptions) to their opponents.
Predictive coding—the future post BCA Trading Send to Email address * Open Help options for Email Address. You can send the message to up to 4 other recipients. Separate each address with a semi-colon (;) Example: name1@company.com; name2@organisation.com From (your details) Name * Email address * Subject
Brown v BCA Trading: Court approves use of predictive coding where one party objected. "Predictive coding" (also known as technology, or computer, assisted review), is a method whereby software analyses documents and "scores" them for relevance, and thereby reduces both the time and costs needed to complete an electronic disclosure exercise. In the case of David Brown v BCA Trading, the Court has approved the use of predictive coding by the Defendant despite this being strongly objected to by the Claimant. English litigation involves a process known as “disclosure” by which all parties are obliged to locate all documents relevant to the proceedings in their possession and provide them (subject to a number of exceptions) to their opponents. On May 17, 2016, in an unreported decision, the High Court granted BCA Trading, a defendant, an order permitting them to use predictive coding despite the plaintiff’s objection. Counsel for BCA Trading argued that a manual review would be disproportionate in cost, and that predictive coding would be more accurate. “Predictive coding was particularly effective in a case such as Brown v BCA, which contained broad allegations of unfair prejudice and bad faith. These issues did not allow the formulation of a sensible set of key words for a traditional disclosure review.
Predictive coding—the future post BCA Trading Send to Email address * Open Help options for Email Address. You can send the message to up to 4 other recipients. Separate each address with a semi-colon (;) Example: name1@company.com; name2@organisation.com From (your details) Name * Email address * Subject
The Litigation and Corporate Risk team at international law firm BLP said they have achieved a successful judgment following a 12 day High Court trial for client BCA Trading (BCA) in a case where it utilised predictive coding to conduct a substantial document review exercise. Predictive Coding was particularly effective in a case such as Brown v BCA, which contained broad allegations of unfair prejudice and bad faith. These issues did not allow the formulation of a sensible set of key words for a traditional disclosure review. Justification for using predictive coding in the UK was further strengthened in the decision of Brown v BCA Trading Ltd & Ors, 4 the first case to validate the use of predictive coding where one party contested it. BCA Trading referred the court to the ten factors set out in Pyrrho in favour of using predictive coding. Of those, one was not applicable (namely, that the parties have agreed on the use of the software, and also how to use it, subject only to the approval of the court) and one was neutral (namely, Brown v BCA Trading Ltd [2016] EWHC 1464 (Ch) is an important England and Wales case management − in which the Companies Court allowed the use of predictive coding in an electronic disclosure process involving the contested party for the first time − for the underlying case of “ unfair prejudice ” petition A disputed predictive coding case from the UK – BCA Trading Posted on August 2, 2016 by Chris Dale We were a long time waiting for the publication of the judgment in Brown v BCA Trading and others , the first occasion, publicly at least, where the use of predictive coding was ordered by the court in the face of opposition. In May 2016, Berwin Leighton Paisner won the first contested application for its client BCA to use predictive coding in Brown v BCA Trading Ltd [2016] EWHC 1464 (Ch). The case built on the progress of the February 2016 landmark ruling in Pyrrho [2016] EWHC 256 (Ch) , in which the High Court approved the use of predictive coding for disclosure at the request of both parties.
If the parties do not agree on the use of predictive coding, they will usually need to set out their positions in evidence. This usually needs to be supported by e-disclosure experts. Both Pyrrho and BCA Trading placed heavy emphasis on the need to save costs; it was the principal determinative factor in BCA Trading. A party seeking to justify the use of predictive coding usually needs evidence to demonstrate potential costs savings.
Brown v. BCA Trading, [2016] EWHC 1464 (Ch) (UK High Court of Justice Chancery Division Companies Court): 05/17/16: Approved Judgment (British court approving use of predictive coding; citing Pyrrho, linked and summarized below) Pyrrho Investments and MWB Business Exchange v. Justification for using predictive coding in the UK was further strengthened in the decision of Brown v BCA Trading Ltd & Ors, 4 the first case to validate the use of predictive coding where one party contested it. Additionally, the High Court’s recent decision in Triumph Controls UK Ltd & Ors v If the parties do not agree on the use of predictive coding, they will usually need to set out their positions in evidence. This usually needs to be supported by e-disclosure experts. Both Pyrrho and BCA Trading placed heavy emphasis on the need to save costs; it was the principal determinative factor in BCA Trading. A party seeking to justify the use of predictive coding usually needs evidence to demonstrate potential costs savings. BLP wins BCA battle in first predictive coding High Court trial. Berwin Leighton Paisner (BLP) has defeated a claim against client BCA Trading after using predictive coding technology in the High Court for the first time. Predictive coding—the future post BCA Trading Send to Email address * Open Help options for Email Address. You can send the message to up to 4 other recipients. Separate each address with a semi-colon (;) Example: name1@company.com; name2@organisation.com From (your details) Name * Email address * Subject Brown v BCA Trading: Court approves use of predictive coding where one party objected. "Predictive coding" (also known as technology, or computer, assisted review), is a method whereby software analyses documents and "scores" them for relevance, and thereby reduces both the time and costs needed to complete an electronic disclosure exercise. In the case of David Brown v BCA Trading, the Court has approved the use of predictive coding by the Defendant despite this being strongly objected to by the Claimant. English litigation involves a process known as “disclosure” by which all parties are obliged to locate all documents relevant to the proceedings in their possession and provide them (subject to a number of exceptions) to their opponents.
Brown v BCA Trading Ltd [2016] EWHC 1464 (Ch) is an important England and Wales case management − in which the Companies Court allowed the use of predictive coding in an electronic disclosure process involving the contested party for the first time − for the underlying case of “ unfair prejudice ” petition
The Litigation and Corporate Risk team at international law firm BLP said they have achieved a successful judgment following a 12 day High Court trial for client BCA Trading (BCA) in a case where it utilised predictive coding to conduct a substantial document review exercise.
Brown v. BCA Trading, [2016] EWHC 1464 (Ch) (UK High Court of Justice Chancery Division Companies Court): 05/17/16: Approved Judgment (British court approving use of predictive coding; citing Pyrrho, linked and summarized below) Pyrrho Investments and MWB Business Exchange v. Justification for using predictive coding in the UK was further strengthened in the decision of Brown v BCA Trading Ltd & Ors, 4 the first case to validate the use of predictive coding where one party contested it. Additionally, the High Court’s recent decision in Triumph Controls UK Ltd & Ors v If the parties do not agree on the use of predictive coding, they will usually need to set out their positions in evidence. This usually needs to be supported by e-disclosure experts. Both Pyrrho and BCA Trading placed heavy emphasis on the need to save costs; it was the principal determinative factor in BCA Trading. A party seeking to justify the use of predictive coding usually needs evidence to demonstrate potential costs savings.