LONDON: Two Saudi princes have failed in their attempt to prevent the media seeing court documents in a sensitive commercial dispute.

The court of appeal in London dismissed the claim by lawyers on behalf of Prince Mishal, a former defence minister, and his son Prince Abdulaziz.The challenge was brought by the Guardian and the Financial Times.

The ruling upholds the principle that some court documents should be available for the fair and accurate reporting of cases.

Lawyers for the Saudis had relied on the Human Rights Act to obtain an interim ban on the reporting of court documents related to the case.

Mark Warby QC, for the princes and Global Torch Ltd, the British Virgin Island company they are said to control, had argued that the principle of open justice “was not a trump card” that automatically removed all the other “fundamental rights” of claimants in a court case.

He said the allegations against the princes were very grave and were an attack on their reputations and their rights to a private and family life under article 8 of the European convention on human rights.

Warby had sought an interim ban on the release of sealed court documents until the trial was heard in full. Some of the claims in the petitions, he alleged, amounted to an “arguable case” of extortion.

But Guy Vassall-Adams, counsel for the Guardian and Financial Times, told the appeal court: “Global Torch has chosen to bring proceedings in this jurisdiction. This is an open justice jurisdiction.

“They [the Saudis] have to accept that these damaging allegations will be heard in open court in the usual way. The protection they are entitled to is a judgment delivered in public which will refute unfounded allegations.

“That’s how a legal system works in a democracy under the rule of law.”

By arrangement with the Guardian