The Supreme Court has allowed the FCA’s appeal in Macris v FCA in an important judgment on individual third party rights. The Court split 3-2 on the issue of law, with Lord Wilson and Lord Mance dissenting.
Lord Sumption for the majority held that a person is identified in a notice under section 393 “if he is identified by name or by a synonym for him, such as his office or job title”. In the case of a synonym it must be apparent from the notice itself that it could only apply to one person and that person must be identifiable from information which is either in the notice or publicly available elsewhere. However, resort to information publicly available elsewhere is permissible only to interpret (as opposed to supplement) the language of the notice.
The full judgment can be read here.