Archive for the 'privilege' Category

Gray v News Group Newspapers Ltd and another; Coogan v Same – WLR Daily

Gray v News Group Newspapers Ltd and another; Coogan v Same [2011] EWHC 349 (Ch); [2011] WLR (D) 65

“The words ‘technical or commercial information’ in the definition of ‘intellectual property’ in section 72(5) of the Senior Courts Act 1981, section 72 (1) of which provided for the withdrawal of privilege against self or spousal incrimination in proceedings for, inter alia, infringement of rights pertaining to any intellectual property, meant technical or commercial information which could be protected by action.”

WLR Daily, 28th February 2011

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

CMCS Common Market Commercial Services AVV v Taylor; Taylor v Stoutt and others – WLR Daily

CMCS Common Market Commercial Services AVV v Taylor; Taylor v Stoutt and others [2011] EWHC 324 (Ch); [2011] WLR (D) 57

“There was no difference in principle between the ambit of a solicitor’s duty to the court in relation to the conduct and supervision of disclosure of documents and the conduct and supervision of any redaction of disclosable doccuments prior to inspection.”

WLR Daily, 24th February 2011

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Clift v Slough Borough Council – WLR Daily

Clift v Slough Borough Council [2010] EWCA Civ 1171; [2010] WLR (D) 343

“Where a public authority had widely disclosed information about a person who had been in contact with its staff, both stating that she had been placed on its violent persons register and enclosing the entry itself, it was relevant, when looking to the applicability of qualified privilege, to have regard to the art 8 Convention rights of the person so identified and also to look to the proportionality of the disclosure itself.”

WLR Daily, 22nd December 2010

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Oceanbulk Shipping and Trading SA v TMT Asia Ltd and others – WLR daily

Oceanbulk Shipping and Trading SA v TMT Asia Ltd and others  [2010] UKSC 44; [2010] WLR(D) 270 

“Facts communicated between parties in the course of ‘without prejudice’ negotiations which, but for the ‘without prejudice’ rule, would be admissible as part of the factual matrix or surrounding circumstances as an aid to construction of the resulting agreement, were admissible in evidence, as an exception to the rule, in a subsequent dispute between the parties as to the proper meaning of a clause in the agreement.”

WLR Daily, 29th October 2010

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Solicitors sue police for wrongful imprisonment – The Independent

“Three solicitors were today suing police for wrongful imprisonment after falling foul of strict prison regulations.”

Full story

The Independent, 19th October 2010

Source: www.independent.co.uk

Legal privilege should not extend to accountants, rules Court of Appeal – OUT-LAW.com

“The right to keep correspondence and documents relating to legal advice secret does not exist when the person giving the advice is an accountant, the Court of Appeal has ruled.”

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 18th October 2010

Source: www.out-law.com

Regina (Prudential plc and another) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax and another (Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales and others intervening) – WLR Daily

Regina (Prudential plc and another) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax and another (Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales and others intervening) [2010] EWCACiv 1094; [2010] WLR (D) 251

“Legal advice privilege applied only to advice given by a member of the legal profession.”

WLR Daily, 13th October 2010

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Court of Appeal confirms limits to legal professional privilege – Law Society’s Gazette

“The Court of Appeal today unanimously confirmed that legal professional privilege (LPP) only applies to qualified lawyers – solicitors and barristers. The decision was welcomed by the Law Society as giving certainty to solicitors and their clients.”

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 14th October 2010

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Privilege judgment is an unjustified blow to in-house lawyers – The Guardian

“The European court of justice’s ruling will prevent in-house lawyers giving frank advice in antitrust cases.”

Full story

The Guardian, 14th September 2010

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Ian Tomlinson post-mortem examination report withheld – BBC News

“A post-mortem examination report into the death of a man at the G20 protests last year has been withheld from authorities, it has emerged.”

Full story

BBC News, 8th September 2010

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

Regina v Seaton – WLR Daily

Regina v Seaton [2010] EWCA Crim 1980; [2010] WLR (D) 234

“Where it was suggested at trial that a defendant’s or witness’s account was a recent fabrication, he could not, unless he had waived legal professional privilege, be asked whether he had told his lawyer what he now said was the truth, or whether he was willing to waive the privilege. If a defendant gave evidence of what had passed between him and his lawyer, he could not be in breach of his own privilege, but was waiving privilege, although not necessarily waiving it entirely and generally. If a defendant said that he had given his solicitor the account then offered at trial, that would ordinarily mean that he could not be cross-examined about exactly what he had told the solicitor on that topic, but another party could comment upon the fact that the solicitor had not been called to confirm something which, if true, he easily could confirm, if the comment were fair.”

WLR Daily, 20th August 2010

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd – WLR Daily

“In a report concerning an investigation into allegations of corruption against a police officer the media were entitled in the public interest to include the specific allegations made against the officer only where the requirements of the responsible journalism defence or Reynolds privilege were met.”
WLR Daily, 15th July 2010
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Quinn Direct Insurance Ltd v The Law Society of England and Wales – WLR Daily

“There was no reason to imply into the statutory scheme for the regulation of solicitors any provision or term entitling or obliging the Law Society to produce to a qualifying insurer documents emanating from a firm of solicitors into which it had intervened which were subject to the privilege of a client of the firm. If the client consented or his privilege was impliedly waived by a claim against the solicitor then there was no reason why the Law Society, as it had done, could not produce such documents to the qualifying insurer.”
WLR Daily, 15th July 2010
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Law Society seeks to block privilege for non-lawyers – Law Society’s Gazette

“The Law Society has been granted permission to intervene in a Court of Appeal case that could see legal professional privilege (LPP) extended to non-lawyers.”

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 6th May 2010

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Oceanbulk Shipping and Trading SA v TMT Asia Ltd and others – WLR Daily

Oceanbulk Shipping and Trading SA v TMT Asia Ltd and others [2010] EWCA Civ 79; [2010] WLR (D) 40

“There was not, and need not be, an exception to the ‘without prejudice’ rule such as to permit evidence of ‘without prejudice’ communications and discussions to be given if there was a dispute about the interpretation of a written settlement agreement.”

WLR Daily, 16th February 2010

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Regina v K (Matrimonial proceedings: Privilege against self-incrimination) – Times Law Report

Regina v K (Matrimonial proceedings: Privilege against self-incrimination)

Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

“While information disclosed under compulsion in matrimonial ancillary relief proceedings was not admissible in criminal proceedings, admissions made in withoutprejudice negotiations were not inadmissible.”

The Times, 19th August 2009

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Lawyer-client privilege can’t stop surveillance, says House of Lords – OUT-LAW.com

“The state is allowed to bug communication between lawyers and their clients, the House of Lords has said. The UK’s highest court ruled that spy law the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) allows lawyers’ conversations to be bugged.”

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 23rd March 2009

Source: www.out-law.com

McE v Prison Service of Northern Ireland; C and A v Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland; M v Same – WLR Daily

McE v Prison Service of Northern Ireland; C and A v Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland; M v Same [2009] UKHL 15; [2009] WLR(D) 90

The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (‘RIPA’) permitted covert surveillance of communications between lawyers and their clients covered by legal professional privilege and notwithstanding any statutory rights of persons in custody to consult privately with their lawyers.”

WLR Daily, 12th March 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

McE v Prison Service of Northern Ireland and Another; C and A v Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland; M v Same – Times Law Reports

McE v Prison Service of Northern Ireland and Another; C and A v Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland; M v Same

House of Lords

“Covert surveillance of communications between lawyers and their clients, covered by legal professional privilege, was permitted under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, notwithstanding any statutory rights of persons in custody to consult their lawyers in private.”

The Times, 12th March 2009

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

Westcott v Westcott – Times Law Reports

Westcott v Westcott

Court of Appeal

“A person who made a complaint to the police, instigating an investigation which did not lead to a prosecution, was entitled to rely on the defence of absolute privilege if proceedings were subsequently brought.”

The Times, 27th August 2008

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

West London Pipeline and Storage Ltd v Total UK Ltd – WLR Daily

West London Pipeline and Storage Ltd v Total UK Ltd [2008] EWHC 1729 (Comm); [2008] WLR (D) 248

“Guidance as to the principles applicable to determining a claim to litigation privilege.”

WLR Daily, 23rd July 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Westcott v Westcott – WLR Daily

Westcott v Westcott [2008] EWCA Civ 818; [2008] WLR (D) 241

A person who made a complaint to the police, thereby instigating a police investigation which did not lead to a prosecution, was entitled to rely on the defence of absolute privilege if defamation proceedings were subsequently brought.”

WLR Daily, 16th July 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Taping killer’s calls broke the rules, Jack Straw admits – The Times

“Prison staff bugged conversations between a convicted killer and his solicitor without authorisation, Jack Straw admitted yesterday.”

Full story

The Times, 16th May 2008

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Curistan v Times Newspapers Ltd – Times Law Reports

Curistan v Times Newspapers Ltd

Court of Appeal

“The privilege which attached to a fair and accurate report of parliamentary proceedings was not necessarily lost because of the addition of extraneous nonprivileged material in the same article.”

The Times, 6th May 2008

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

Curistan v Times Newspapers Ltd – WLR Daily

Curistan v Times Newspapers Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 432; [2008] WLR (D) 135

The qualified privilege which attached to a ‘fair and accurate’ report of parliamentary proceedings was not necessarily lost because of the addition of extraneous non-privileged material in the same article. Where an article consisted in part only of passages entitled to such privilege, the meaning of the non-privileged passages was to be ascertained on the basis that the privileged passages merely provided the context in which the other statements were made, and the repetition rule, under which for the purpose of libel law a hearsay statement was the same as a direct statement, had no application to the privileged passages.”

WLR Daily, 1st May 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.


Law Society backs in-house lawyers in landmark privilege case – The Times

“The Law Society of England and Wales has formally applied for permission to intervene in a closely-watched European case that has threatened the ability of in-house lawyers to claim professional privilege.”

Full story

The Times, 10th March 2008

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Expandable Ltd and Others v Rubin – Times Law Reports

Expandable Ltd and Others v Rubin

Court of Appeal

“The mention of a document in a witness statement did not constitute an automatic waiver of legal professional privilege so as entitle the other party to inspection of it.”

The Times, 10th March 2008

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

Seaga v Harper – Times Law Reports

Seaga v Harper

Privy Council

“The defence of qualified privilege established in Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd ([2001] 2 AC 127) was available not only to the press and broadcasting media but could also extend to the publication by any person of material of public interest.”

The Times, 15th February 2008

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

Expandable Ltd and others v Rubin – WLR Daily

Expandable Ltd and others v Rubin [2008] EWCA Civ 59; [2008] WLR (D) 42

“The words ‘he wrote to me … drawing my attention to discrepancies’ in a witness statement were sufficient to amount to mention of a document for the purposes of CPR r 31.14(1), but such mere mention did not constitute an automatic waiver of the legal professional privilege attaching to the document, so as to entitle a party to inspect it pursuant to the rule.”

WLR Daily, 12th February 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Get ready to be raided – The Times

“Companies get no warning about early morning raids by authorities, but they can put in place procedures to deal with them.”

Full story

The Times, 11th December 2007

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Freedom Of Information: Government’s refusal to disclose legal advice challenged in court – The Independent

“Lawyers have long argued that there is absolute protection against the publication of legally privileged advice. Robert Verkaik, Law Editor, finds a case which challenges this.”

Full story

The Independent, 7th December 2007

Source: www.independent.co.uk 

In-house lawyers disappointed with dawn raids decision – The Times

“The confidential protection enjoyed by lawyers over their communications does not extend to in-house lawyers, the European Court of First Instance ruled yesterday.”

Full story

The Times, 17th September 2007

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Barnetson v. Framlington Group Ltd. and Another – Times Law Reports

Extent of without-prejudice  privilege before dispute

Barnetson v. Framlington Group Ltd. and Another 

Court of Appeal

“When considering whether evidence of prelitigation disputes between the parties should be excluded under without-prejudice privilege, the critical feature of proximity to the litigation was the subject matter of the dispute rather than how long before the threat or start of litigation the matter was aired in negotiations between the parties.”

The Times, 11th June 2007

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication. 

Buckley v. Dalziel and Another – Times Law Reports

Complaints to police are privileged

Buckley v. Dalziel and Another

Queen’s Bench Division

“Absolute privilege and immunity from suit were available to a person who provided information to the police to set in motion the process of an inquiry into possible illegality.”

The Times, 7th June 2007

Source: www.thetimesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

Framlington Group Ltd. and another v. Barnetson – WLR Daily

Framlington Group Ltd. and another v. Barnetson [2007] EWCA Civ 502

“An employee’s discussions with his employer about the scope of his entitlement on the employment contract were inadmissible as ‘without prejudice’ communications even though at the time they occurred there was no litigation in prospect and no basis for litigation at the time they took place.”

WLR Daily, 24th May 2007

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.


December 2020
M T W T F S S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  

Categories