Raiffeisen Bank International AG v Asia Coal Energy Ventures Ltd & Anor [2019] EWHC 3 (Comm) (15 January 2019)

Raiffeisen Bank International AG v Asia Coal Energy Ventures Ltd & Anor [2019] EWHC 3 (Comm) (15 January 2019)

The instructions from SM Multiartha to Ashurst are privileged and confidential as they were given in a relevant legal context for the purpose of legal advice; Ashurst was not acting as agent for SM Multiartha in making representations to RBI but gave an independent legal commitment. There was no waiver of privilege, and the documents sought would involve disclosure of privileged communications. Disclosure of the client account balance is not privileged and is ordered.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 3 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Raiffeisen Bank International AG; First Defendant: Asia Coal Energy Ventures Limited; Second Defendant: Ashurst LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application (interlocutory) / Determination of Applications for Further Information and Specific Disclosure
Outcome
Application for disclosure of instructions and related documents refused; application for disclosure of client account balance granted; requests for further information largely refused.
Legal Topics
Disclosure, Legal Advice Privilege, Requests for Further Information, Confidentiality of Client Instructions, Misrepresentation, Breach of Contract
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Legal Professional Privilege Disclosure Legal Advice Privilege Requests for Further Information Confidentiality of Client Instructions Misrepresentation +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Raiffeisen Bank International AG

Claimant

Asia Coal Energy Ventures Limited

First Defendant

Ashurst LLP

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application (interlocutory) / Determination of Applications for Further Information and Specific Disclosure

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether instructions from SM Multiartha to Ashurst are privileged and confidential
  2. 2 Whether Ashurst must disclose documents containing instructions or variations thereof
  3. 3 Whether Ashurst must answer requests for further information regarding the instructions and internal decision-making

Ratio Decidendi

The instructions from SM Multiartha to Ashurst are privileged and confidential as they were given in a relevant legal context for the purpose of legal advice; Ashurst was not acting as agent for SM Multiartha in making representations to RBI but gave an independent legal commitment. There was no waiver of privilege, and the documents sought would involve disclosure of privileged communications. Disclosure of the client account balance is not privileged and is ordered.

Court Disposition

Application for disclosure of instructions and related documents refused; application for disclosure of client account balance granted; requests for further information largely refused.

Orders

  • Disclosure and inspection of the balance of Ashurst's client account as set out in paragraph 1(c) of the draft order is granted.
  • Disclosure of documents containing instructions, variations, or related communications between SM Multiartha and Ashurst is refused.