Oceanbulk Shipping & Trading SA v TMT Asia Ltd & ors [2010] UKSC 44

Privilege: Making Briggs without Clay

Stewart Hey, Simon Heatley and Iona Macmillan Douglas brush the dust off without prejudice privilege ‘There was no dispute that the relevant correspondence was without prejudice (WP). The question for the court was whether any exception to the rule applied.’ Legal professional privilege has been in the spotlight (and very rarely out of it) in …

Continue reading "Privilege: Making Briggs without Clay"

This post is only available to members.

Privilege: Negotiation with prejudice

Clare Toomer considers the decision in Avonwick v Webinvest [2014] ‘Parties should be aware that while the express marking of documents as without prejudice remains a highly material factor in determining their status, it is not conclusive.’ It is often thought that heading a letter ‘without prejudice’ will protect it from being disclosed later in …

Continue reading "Privilege: Negotiation with prejudice"

This post is only available to members.

Evidence: All the cards on the table

Mike Wells and Donald McDonald consider recent cases on evidence and privilege ‘Documents that appear pertinent at first sight may, in fact, be irrelevant as a matter of law and so rendered inadmissible. A familiar example of irrelevance as a matter of law is the inadmissibility of evidence as to the parties’ subjective intentions for …

Continue reading "Evidence: All the cards on the table"

This post is only available to members.

Drafting: Unintended consequences

Tim Hardy investigates practical considerations in the light of the decision in Oceanbulk ‘It is trite law that statements made in the course of genuine settlementegotiations are subject to without prejudice privilege, and evidence of those statements is only admissible in limited circumstances.’The Supreme Court, in Oceanbulk Shipping & Trading SA v TMT Asia Ltd …

Continue reading "Drafting: Unintended consequences"

This post is only available to members.