Summary

Access restrictions can be applied to folders containing confidential documents, limiting access to certain parties and / or a subset of users per party. 

Access restrictions are applied at a folder level, ensuring effective management and therefore it is important that the parties consider the confidential requirements in advance of uploading of documents as they will have implications for bundle structures. 

Restrictions should be applied to top-level folders to ensure that the requests are cost and time efficient, and users can easily manage the distinction in the material.

Opus have managed multiple matters with differing levels of confidentiality restrictions over the past 10+ years, including high profile litigations, arbitrations and inquests/inquiries . We've set out our best practice guidance here based on this experience to ensure confidentiality requirements can be effectively and most importantly, securely managed on the platform. 

You are able to adopt multiple approaches below depending on the requirements of your bundle. Please reach out to your Solution Operations Manager before preparing the upload as they are best placed to discuss how we can tailor the approaches to your bespoke needs.

Applying Restrictions

Depending on the type of access required, restrictions can be applied in one of two ways:

  1. Workspace Level - Restrictions are applied to a folder, which is made available to some party workspaces (and is viewable by all users in those workspaces by default) but not available to other workspaces.
    1. For example, if a matter has three parties and there is a hearing between two of the parties, for which the relevant documents should only be seen by those two parties, we are able to make the folder available by default to all users within the two relevant party workspaces only (plus Judge/Tribunal etc) only, but not available to the third party.

      To ensure transparency across the instruction as Opus 2 are a neutral provider, in all instances where bundles are being made available to a subset of the parties and the Judge/Tribunal, we request that an email is sent to Opus 2 with all parties on the matter copied confirming the intention to upload a bundle of this nature. This email need not confirm the contents of the bundle but enables us and the parties to manage the bundle references assigned across the workspace in the most efficient manner.
  2. User Level – Restrictions are applied to a folder, which is hidden by default from all users (or specified workspaces if required). This can be particularly useful where confidentiality rings are required. 
    1. Adding Party Specific Users - Each party would need to confirm the relevant list of users who should be granted access in their party specific workspace(s) and Opus would release the folder. For any new users added to the platform after the initial release, the parties would need to explicitly request access to the restricted folder. 
    2. Joint Workspaces (Judge / Tribunal / EPE) - The parties would need to confirm in a joint instructional email, which users from the Judge / Tribunal workspaces should have access to this bundle, as well as whether it should be made available to our EPE operator for display at the hearing.
If made available to the EPE Operator, it would be Counsel's responsibility to ensure the confidential documents are called at the correct times during proceedings as the Operator will show documents when called, regardless of the confidentiality.

With both of the above approaches, the parties will need to make it clear in the email instruction that access restrictions need to be applied when uploading a confidential bundle, as any new bundles would be made available to all users across all workspaces by default. We'd recommend in advance of sending any confidential documents for upload, to arrange a call with the Solution Operations team so we can provide more bespoke guidance on the management of your confidential bundles.

Given the complexity involved in managing such restrictions, only a subset of senior members of our team can advise on and action these requests, so it may take longer than usual to assist with confidential type requests so please factor this in to any timelines.  

Bundle Structures

We will work with the parties to ensure that the confidential documents are organised in a way that is most suited to your matter and we've set out some of the most common approaches below:

  1. Duplicate Bundle Structures - The parties would upload two versions of a bundle, being a non-confidential bundle that contains redacted versions of the confidential documents and can be accessed by all users on all workspaces, alongside a supplementary confidential bundle, which contains the confidential versions of the documents and has access restricted. The Bundle/Tab values could correspond, albeit with the confidential versions having an 'X' bundle prefix. 
    1. For example, redacted witness statements can be housed in the non-confidential bundle at references A/1 to A/5 and unredacted versions can be housed in the confidential bundle at XA/1 to XA/5, or if only one confidential document, XA/2.
    2. Confidentiality Rings - If the documents have confidentiality rings the prefixes could be 'O' for Outer ring and 'I' for Inner ring, i.e. OA/1 and IA/1 or just IA/1 is no Outer version exists etc.  
    3. No Redacted Version - This approach can also be adopted where there is only a a confidential version of the document and a hyperlinked placeholder can be included in the non-confidential bundle, linking to the confidential version but the link only being functional for those users who have access.
  2. Standalone Bundle - The parties would upload one version of the bundle, being just the confidential documents which are not related to unredacted versions in the main Hearing Bundle. The bundle reference assigned as 'X' or volumised as 'X1', 'X2' etc and the tabs would run sequentially from 1.
    1. For example, the Hearing Bundle may run bundles A-F but the confidential documents would be grouped under bundle X as X/1 to X/8, or X1/1 to X1/8.
  3. Claim Specific Bundles - For matters which include multiple claims under the same instruction, the parties are able to upload the relevant documents into claim specific folder structures and restrict access to only the relevant parties / users who are a part of the claim. Each Claim folder acts as a mini Hearing Bundle with the Bundle references being prefixed to ensure they are unique values across the claims.