Sotheby's v Mark Weiss Ltd & Ors
Sotheby’s failed to establish that the dominant purpose of the correspondence with Mr. Martin and Mr. Twilley was use in contemplated litigation; both commercial and litigation purposes were of equal importance. Therefore, the correspondence is not protected by litigation privilege.
- Parties
- Claimant: Sotheby’s; First Defendant: Mark Weiss Limited; Second Defendant: Fairlight Art Ventures LLP; Third Defendant: Mark Adrian F. Weiss
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 26 November 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Commercial Court Application / Ruling on Application for Inspection of Documents Withheld for Litigation Privilege
- Outcome
- Application for inspection granted
- Legal Topics
- Litigation Privilege, Disclosure of Documents, Dominant Purpose Test, Art Sale Contracts
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Sotheby’s
Claimant
Mark Weiss Limited
First Defendant
Fairlight Art Ventures LLP
Second Defendant
Mark Adrian F. Weiss
Third Defendant
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application / Ruling on Application for Inspection of Documents Withheld for Litigation Privilege
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether correspondence between Sotheby’s and art experts is protected by litigation privilege
- 2 Whether the dominant purpose of the correspondence was use in contemplated litigation
Ratio Decidendi
Sotheby’s failed to establish that the dominant purpose of the correspondence with Mr. Martin and Mr. Twilley was use in contemplated litigation; both commercial and litigation purposes were of equal importance. Therefore, the correspondence is not protected by litigation privilege.
Court Disposition
Application for inspection granted
Orders
- Sotheby’s to allow inspection of the correspondence with Mr. Martin and Mr. Twilley
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment