Dispute Resolution analysis: In an application for pre-action disclosure, Moulder J held that litigation privilege attached to communications between the (proposed) defendant and its subcontractor. The (proposed) claimant alleged that the dominant purpose of the communications was a parallel claim the subcontractor had against the defendant. But since the defendant and its subcontractor could be shown to have worked together to prepare the defendant’s claim against the claimant, that latter piece of litigation was found to be the dominant purpose of communications. The case provides a useful summary and application of the authorities on litigation privilege, as well as some helpful judicial observations on how far a party need go to comply with a disclosure order. Written by Daniel Webb, barrister at Selborne Chambers.

Construction analysis: Mrs Justice O’Farrell reviewed the relevant authorities concerning a claim of legal privilege over relevant documents under the Practice Direction 51U Disclosure Pilot. This judgment arose from the sixth case management conference in a £140m dispute over alleged construction defects in the Northumbria Specialist Emergency Case Hospital, completed by Lendlease in 2015. A significant element of the claim is for the cost of a facility into which sections of the hospital can be decanted while repairs are undertaken to the main building. The trial is due to commence in October 2022. Written by Nicholas Higgs, barrister at 39 Essex Chambers.

Dispute Resolution analysis: In the context of ongoing litigation between the parties, the question on appeal was whether a letter of claim sent under the pre-action protocol for professional negligence to Ahuja’s conveyancing solicitors, Stradbrooks, as well as the response from Stradbrooks’ insurers, were within the scope of litigation privilege. The High Court, on appeal from the order of Master Pester, held that the dominant purpose of the correspondence was to elicit information to be used in the ongoing present proceedings and even though there was an element of deception as to the purpose of the correspondence, there was no principled reason why the protection of privilege should not be available in relation to that information. The decision also stresses that the privilege is that of the litigant, not the third party. Written by Natalie Todd, partner at PCB Byrne LLP.

Please click for the Precedent Litigation register. Please note that this register has been prepared in Excel and it therefore cannot be downloaded to Word. This Precedent Litigation register is intended

This group was formed in 2003 by 'a group of litigation support specialists with the aim of encouraging and developing uniformity of approach to the use of technology in litigation and alternative dispute resolution'.

MLex: Fifteen legal challenges brought by EU oil and gas producers against the bloc's Carbon Capture and Storage framework are set to test the legal foundations of a key pillar of the Net-Zero Industry Act. The cases involve companies responsible for more than 65 percent of the EU's planned CO2 storage capacity by 2030 and could shape the regulatory certainty needed to develop a European carbon-storage market.

1 Introduction 1.1 This document sets out our policy for dealing with litigation and advocacy before any court or tribunal and any form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). It reflects duties imposed on us by the court and the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) as well as general professional duties. 1.2 Failure to comply with these duties can have serious consequences: 1.2.1 the firm or a member of staff could be in contempt of court, which is ultimately punishable by a fine or even imprisonment; 1.2.2 our reputation could be damaged; 1.2.3 the firm or individuals within the firm could be disciplined by the SRA or another regulator, which could lead to fines, disqualification or other sanctions; 1.2.4 we may receive a formal complaint from our client or another party. 1.3 We have always taken our duties to the court seriously and we will continue to do so. 2 Scope of this policy 2.1 This policy covers: 2.1.1 litigation and advocacy before any court or tribunal; 2.1.2 alternative dispute resolution (ADR), eg mediation or arbitration. 2.2 This includes all pre-litigation, pre-advocacy and pre-ADR work. Any reference to the court includes tribunals, arbitrators, mediators and equivalent bodies or persons.

1 General information Date of review Person(s) conducting review [Insert date] [Insert name(s)] 2 Review and findings Issue reviewed Findings Is your Advocacy, litigation and ADR policy up to date and fit for purpose? ☐  Yes ☐  No (set an action point at 3 below) Have all relevant staff been trained on their duties to the court and your Advocacy, litigation and ADR policy? ☐

Law360, London: Sony and Apple will challenge the validity of widely used litigation-financing agreements at the Court of Appeal on 10 June 2025 against the backdrop of an influential report calling for legislation to urgently reverse a landmark ruling that shook the funding industry.

Law360, London: A representative of more than 45 million UK consumers in a class action against Mastercard is being sued by his litigation-funder over his decision to reach a settlement in the £10bn case for £200m.

Private Client analysis: A Supreme Court judgment concerning allocation of costs and the role of insurers in the litigation process is examined by Matthew Duncan, a partner at Kingsley Napley LLP.

What is littering? Litter can be anything from a crisp packet to a bag of rubbish. All litter is unsightly and causes untidiness. Common litter items include fast-food packaging, sweet wrappers, drinks cans, bottles and cigarette butts. Litter can take years to degrade, causing harm to the environment, and in particular to wildlife and habitats. What is fly-tipping? Fly-tipping is the illegal deposit of waste. It can cause pollution, harm to human health and can affect the amenity of the area. It undermines the system of environmental permitting and registration of waste carriers. Fly-tipped waste can be inert or hazardous, liquid or solid and can vary in scale from a single bin bag to large quantities of waste dumped from vans or trucks. It is distinct from littering which involves smaller items of waste often associated with smoking, eating and drinking. Fly-tipping is often an organised activity, and can be part of larger illegal operations. The causes of fly-tipping are varied, however the main reasons for organised illegal waste operations involve financial gain or