The court found there was no jurisdiction to seek documents held outside England and Wales
The High Court has rejected a Ferrari pre-action disclosure application brought by Robert Ebert, finding that it had no power to allow the application to be served on Ferrari in Italy for documents held outside England and Wales.
Mrs Justice O’Farrell DBE handed down the judgment on 3 September 2026 in the Technology and Construction Court. The dispute concerned whether section 33(2) of the Senior Courts Act 1981 allowed an application for pre-action disclosure against a foreign respondent where the documents were located abroad.
Mr Ebert was involved in a fatal traffic accident in Hong Kong in June 2015 while driving a Ferrari 458 Spider. He was subsequently convicted of causing death by dangerous driving after relying at trial on a defence that the vehicle’s brakes had suddenly failed. His appeal was dismissed and he was sentenced to 22 months’ imprisonment in October 2016.
In 2021, Ferrari issued a recall covering certain vehicles, including the 458 Spider model produced in the same year as Mr Ebert’s vehicle. The recall referred to brake-system defects that could potentially lead to partial or total loss of braking capability. Mr Ebert’s proposed claim alleged that such defects caused the accident and that Ferrari knew, or should have known, about them. Ferrari disputed those allegations.
Mr Ebert sought documents including Ferrari board materials, communications concerning the brake issues, reports and investigations, and documents relating to evidence given by Ferrari employee Martino Casolari at the criminal trial.
The court held that section 33(2) of the Senior Courts Act 1981 did not permit proceedings against a party outside the jurisdiction in respect of documents located outside the jurisdiction. The principle of territoriality meant there was a presumption against applying domestic legislation in that way, and the court found no express wording or necessary implication rebutting that presumption.
The judgment also considered the international framework for obtaining evidence from abroad. The UK and Italy are parties to the Hague Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters, while both countries have reservations concerning pre-trial discovery of documents. The court concluded that allowing the application would be inconsistent with international comity and the established system for obtaining evidence between jurisdictions.
The judge additionally found that the application failed other parts of the test for service outside the jurisdiction. The proposed disclosure was not desirable for resolving the anticipated proceedings, assisting settlement or saving costs. The categories of documents were also considered too broad and amounted to a “fishing expedition”.
The court was also not satisfied that England and Wales was clearly or distinctly the appropriate forum. Ferrari and relevant witnesses were based in Italy and Hong Kong, while the accident, vehicle examination and criminal trial had taken place in Hong Kong.
Mrs Justice O’Farrell therefore set aside the September 2025 order that had permitted service of the pre-action disclosure application on Ferrari in Italy and declared that the court had no jurisdiction in relation to the application, or would not exercise it.
The judgment states that, in an appropriate compelling case, the letter of request procedure should be used rather than circumvented to obtain evidence from a foreign jurisdiction