Clawback redaction is the removal of personal data from documents covered by CPR 31.20, which limits the use of an inadvertently disclosed privileged item. The court's discretion to allow use anyway turns on whether the mistake was obvious — the test set in Al-Fayed v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2002] EWCA Civ 780. anonym.plus keeps the work in-house, so a slip does not give away privilege in the first place.
When this applies
CPR 31.20 lets you seek to restrain use of an item disclosed by mistake, but Al-Fayed shows a court is far less sympathetic where the receiving solicitor should have realised at once that privilege had not been waived. Keeping the review local cuts the chance of a leak and supports the argument that reasonable care was taken.
How anonym.plus handles it
- Open the documents in anonym.plus on your device.
- It flags names, contacts, and IDs across each file.
- Mark privileged passages for in-house handling.
- Confirm the flags before any disclosure.
- Redact or mask each confirmed item.
- Save the clean files on your device.
What you need to provide
- The documents (PDF, DOCX, or native files).
- An operator; Redact for full removal of sensitive text.
- Optional privilege tags to track handled items.
PII entity types detected
| Category | anonym.plus entity type | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Names | PERSON | client name → [CLIENT] |
| Names | PERSON | solicitor name → [SOLICITOR] |
| Contact | EMAIL_ADDRESS | privileged email → [EMAIL] |
| Dates | DATE_TIME | advice date → [DATE] |
| Identifiers | UK_NINO | NINO → [NINO] |
| Document IDs | PERSON | page ref → [DOC_ID] |
Compliance achieved
- Supports a clawback application under CPR 31.20.
- Reduces the risk of the kind of obvious, checkable mistake courts weigh under Al-Fayed v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2002] EWCA Civ 780.
- Local processing keeps privileged material in-house before any disclosure decision is finalised.
- On-device AES-256-GCM guards working files.
Anonymise clawback documents offline — see plans & start free →
Limitations & cautions
CPR 31.20 limits the harm of a slip, but it is not a cure-all. The court may still permit use of an item in some cases. Treat the rule as a backstop, not a substitute for careful review, and confirm each flag before anything goes out.
Frequently asked questions
What does CPR 31.20 do?
Where a privileged document is inadvertently disclosed, CPR 31.20 says the other party may use it only with the court's permission. It underpins a clawback application over a mistaken disclosure, rather than an automatic bar on use.
Does local processing help the privilege claim?
Yes. Keeping data in-house shows reasonable steps to protect privilege and cuts the chance of a third-party leak, which matters because Al-Fayed asks whether the mistake should have been obvious to a reasonably competent solicitor on the other side.
Can I tag privileged passages as I go?
Yes. Privilege tags track which items you handled, which helps document your process if a clawback dispute under CPR 31.20 ever needs explaining to the court.