- High Court finds that investigative reports not protected by litigation privilege (Qatar v Banque Havilland)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Dispute Resolution analysis: Successfully asserting litigation privilege over a document requires identifying when adversarial litigation is in contemplation, and whether a document has been created for that sole or dominant purpose. When an investigative report is commissioned for a range of reasons, this can be difficult. In this case, the court refused a claim to litigation privilege over an accountants’ investigative report. Although the issue addressed in the report was a serious one (with the potential for serious legal and regulatory consequences), there was insufficient evidence that it had been commissioned for the sole or dominant purpose of adversarial litigation. The court also considered the circumstances in which it was proper to go behind a solicitor’s witness statement explaining the basis for the claim to privilege. Written by Harriet Campbell, senior knowledge development lawyer at Stephenson Harwood LLP.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial