Pragmatism and Theory in English Law - College of Social Sciences ...

The Strengths of the Pragmatic Tradition 63
Here again, new developments and extensions have
occurred, and precautions have been taken to prevent
abuse. Strictly speaking, the Anton Piller order does not give
the plaintiff an actual right to enter the defendant's premises,
but if the defendant refuses him access by force, he may
be in contempt. In practice what happens is that the order
is served by the plaintiff's solicitor, who will advise the
defendant that he may consult his own solicitor, and will
give him the chance to do so. But the defendant is for practical
purposes restrained from disappearing or destroying the
evidence in his premises. The efficacy of the Anton Piller
order was greatly enhanced when it was decided that an
order for disclosure of information could be attached to it,
and although the House of Lords then proceeded to hold
that such an order could not require a defendant to incriminate
himself, 31 this decision was reversed within a few
months by the Supreme Court Act 1981. 32 The availability
of the orders was also extended in 1978 to catch the socalled
"bootleggers" who attend live musical performances
and record the music with secret recording devices concealed
on their person or in suitable containers. 33
Like the Mareva injunction, these Anton Piller orders have
been astonishingly successful. 34 They are in very extensive
use, and I am told on good authority that a large firm of
London solicitors maintains a whole section of its litigation
department devoted to handling and serving Anton Piller
orders. Again, as with the Mareva injunction, many new
uses have been found for these orders. For instance, they
can be used in passing off actions as well as in copyright
31 Rank Film Distributors Ltd. v. Video Information Centre [1982] A.C. 350.
32 s.72.
33 Ex p. Island Records Ltd. [1978] Ch. 122.
34 See Ann Staines, (1983) 46 M.L.R. 278.