back to article Cambridge Analytica's administrators misled judge, High Court told

Lawyers for a man who sued the Cambridge Analytica group for £20,000 claiming misuse of his personal data have suggested the controversial data-mining biz misled a High Court judge when the companies were put into administration. In a hearing at the High Court today, barrister Andreas Gledhill told Insolvency Judge Barnett: " …

  1. sbt Silver badge

    Lawyers 10, Rest of the World 0.

    Oh, what a tangled web we weave

    When first we practise to deceive!

    -- Walter Scott, "Marmion" (1808)

  2. Aladdin Sane Silver badge


    See above

  3. Zog_but_not_the_first
    Big Brother


    Was in the boxes?

  4. This post has been deleted by a moderator

  5. regbadgerer

    Er, what?

    I might be because it's Friday afternoon, but is it me or did none of that make any sense?

    1. cd

      Re: Er, what?

      Pretend you are Lewis Carroll making a sequel to Alice in Wonderland while reading it.

      1. Dave 126 Silver badge

        Re: Er, what?

        Yep, it's one of a few Reg articles that read as if the author doesn't know what is going on. There's no shame in that - but it's helpful to the readership if it's admitted to.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Er, what?

      " it me or did none of that make any sense?"

      Nope, I didn't understand anything of that legal mumbo-jumbo either.

      Luckily for us there are commentards here on El Reg that do understand a bit of what this about.

      (See "Zippy´s Sausage Factory" comment below for more details.)

    3. Lotaresco

      Re: Er, what?

      It makes sense, but you need to read carefully through the guarded language used by barristers.

      Instead of overtly stating that CA was operated fraudulently, they have to tease out the evidence on piece at a time. The information that Emerdata were funding CA's costs is (IMO) damning because it shows that Emerdata are effectively cutting CA free in the hope that the problems with CA are not then traced back to the wider group of companies and that Emerdata don't have to face any legal consequences. If they succeed, and it looks as if they have, then they get to open another CA-like company and do it all over again. The picking around Green's involvement appears to be trying to highlight that CA wasn't necessarily bankrupt but was positioning itself to become bankrupt in the hope that would kill off any SARs.

  6. Zippy´s Sausage Factory

    It's beginning to look a lot like Fraudmas...

    Seriously, it's starting to look to me like CA was put into receivership to try and wriggle out of legal complications, rather than because it ran out of money.

    Actually, I'm lying. It's always looked like that to me...

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: It's beginning to look a lot like Fraudmas...

      Expecting this to become the norm for elections and even ad campaigns - spin up a company for the campaign and close it afterwards before the GDPR fines arrive.

  7. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    "We say that for reasons that are not easy to understand, disclosure of none of that was made to Mr Justice Hildyard."

    I think this is an example of barrister's humour.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021