The privileged few: practitioners and litigants must take ADR and the CPR into account before using without prejudice privilege, or face costs
Awadalla, K.
The privileged few: practitioners and litigants must take ADR and the CPR into account before using without prejudice privilege, or face costs - 2003 - Solicitors' Journal 147(2) 17 January 2003, 43-44(2) .
The principle of without prejudice privilege (WPP) is difficult to apply. Errors are often made when it is used inappropriately or where 'privileged' correspondence is wrongly excluded from evidence. Mistakes can be avoided by considering the background and rationale of the privilege and its exceptions and function in litigation. Case law.
CIVIL LITIGATION
DISPUTE RESOLUTION
WITHOUT PREJUDICE PRIVILEGE
WITHOUT PREJUDICE
RUSH AND TOMPKINS LTD V GREATER LONDON COUNCIL AND ANOTHER
PRUDENTIAL ASSURANCE CO LTD V PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE CO OF AMERICA
UNILEVER PLC V PROCTOR AND GAMBLE CO
SOMATRA V SINCLAIR ROCHE AND TEMPLEY
DUNNETT V RAILTRACK PLC
CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES
The privileged few: practitioners and litigants must take ADR and the CPR into account before using without prejudice privilege, or face costs - 2003 - Solicitors' Journal 147(2) 17 January 2003, 43-44(2) .
The principle of without prejudice privilege (WPP) is difficult to apply. Errors are often made when it is used inappropriately or where 'privileged' correspondence is wrongly excluded from evidence. Mistakes can be avoided by considering the background and rationale of the privilege and its exceptions and function in litigation. Case law.
CIVIL LITIGATION
DISPUTE RESOLUTION
WITHOUT PREJUDICE PRIVILEGE
WITHOUT PREJUDICE
RUSH AND TOMPKINS LTD V GREATER LONDON COUNCIL AND ANOTHER
PRUDENTIAL ASSURANCE CO LTD V PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE CO OF AMERICA
UNILEVER PLC V PROCTOR AND GAMBLE CO
SOMATRA V SINCLAIR ROCHE AND TEMPLEY
DUNNETT V RAILTRACK PLC
CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES