Watson v McLernonWatson v McLernon & Ors Watson & Anor v McLernon; [2000] NSWSC 306

Watson v McLernonWatson v McLernon & Ors Watson & Anor v McLernon; [2000] NSWSC 306

Legal professional privilege was not established, as the Court found that if pressed to decide on the same evidence at a final hearing (where adverse inferences could be drawn from the plaintiffs' silence), it could and would find that the communications with Minter Ellison in December 1995 and January 1996 were in furtherance of a dishonest and improper purpose—namely, the deliberate and dishonest subversion of MGI's business interests and use of confidential information, thus displacing the privilege. In the result, the plaintiffs failed to establish they were entitled to claim privilege over the disputed communications.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 April 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Determination at First Instance
Outcome
Dismissed - plaintiff to pay defendants' costs of proceedings
Legal Topics
['legal Professional Privilege' 'improper Purpose Exception' 'waiver of Privilege']
['equity' 'evidence'] ['legal Professional Privilege' 'improper Purpose Exception' 'waiver of Privilege']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Civil / Final Determination at First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether legal professional privilege attaches to communications between Mr Kelly, Mr Watson, and Minter Ellison solicitors; whether privilege is negated by communications made in furtherance of an improper purpose; whether privilege was waived; whether release executed bars claims against Mr James; whether any discretionary or equitable defences (unclean hands) preclude relief.']

Ratio Decidendi

Legal professional privilege was not established, as the Court found that if pressed to decide on the same evidence at a final hearing (where adverse inferences could be drawn from the plaintiffs' silence), it could and would find that the communications with Minter Ellison in December 1995 and January 1996 were in furtherance of a dishonest and improper purpose—namely, the deliberate and dishonest subversion of MGI's business interests and use of confidential information, thus displacing the privilege. In the result, the plaintiffs failed to establish they were entitled to claim privilege over the disputed communications.

Court Disposition

Dismissed - plaintiff to pay defendants' costs of proceedings

Orders

  • ["Plaintiffs' claims dismissed." "Plaintiffs to pay defendants' costs of proceedings."]