Baker, R. & Ors v. Evans, C. & Ors [1987] FCA 261

Baker, R. & Ors v. Evans, C. & Ors [1987] FCA 261

Legal professional privilege cannot be claimed by persons merely interested in a dissolved company, as the privilege is that of the client. Privilege is destroyed where a prima facie case of fraud in the creation of scheme documents is laid out. Waiver was not established on fairness grounds. No error was demonstrated in issuing the warrants.

Parties
First Applicant: Richard Edward Baker; First Applicant: Peter Anthony Hughes; First Applicant: Kevin Allan Montgomery; Second Applicant: John Costello; Second Applicant: Kenneth Gordon; Second Applicant: Ronald Hopkins; First Respondent: Clyde Evans; Second Respondent: Christopher Alexander Buttner; Third Respondent: Stanley Thomas Woods
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 May 1987
Procedural Posture
Application for Orders of Review and Relief / Final Judgment
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Search Warrants, Legal Professional Privilege, Sales Tax Avoidance, Fraud, Bills of Sale
Criminal Law Tax Law Commercial Law Search Warrants Legal Professional Privilege Sales Tax Avoidance Fraud Bills of Sale

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 3 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Edward Baker

First Applicant

Peter Anthony Hughes

First Applicant

Kevin Allan Montgomery

First Applicant

John Costello

Second Applicant

Kenneth Gordon

Second Applicant

Ronald Hopkins

Second Applicant

Clyde Evans

First Respondent

Christopher Alexander Buttner

Second Respondent

Stanley Thomas Woods

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Orders of Review and Relief / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicants have standing to claim legal professional privilege over seized documents in a dissolved company context
  2. 2 Whether legal professional privilege applies where fraud is alleged in scheme documents
  3. 3 Whether police search warrants for solicitors' offices may override privilege

Ratio Decidendi

Legal professional privilege cannot be claimed by persons merely interested in a dissolved company, as the privilege is that of the client. Privilege is destroyed where a prima facie case of fraud in the creation of scheme documents is laid out. Waiver was not established on fairness grounds. No error was demonstrated in issuing the warrants.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application be dismissed.
  • File numbered 2 returned to applicants.