CIBC Mellon Trust Co & Anor v Wolfgang Otto Stolzenberg & Ors [2001] EWCA Civ 1222 (13 July 2001)

CIBC Mellon Trust Co & Anor v Wolfgang Otto Stolzenberg & Ors [2001] EWCA Civ 1222 (13 July 2001)

The application for disclosure was fundamentally based on information obtained during a without prejudice meeting, and the claimants could not circumvent this privilege by relying on subsequent correspondence or witness statements that were themselves rooted in the privileged meeting. Thus, the application was dismissed as it relied on inadmissible evidence.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 1222
Parties
Claimants/applicants: CIBC Mellon Trust Co & Another; Defendants/respondents: Wolfgang Otto Stolzenberg & Others
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 July 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (with Appeal to Follow If Granted) From a Chancery Division Decision
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Without Prejudice Communications, Legal Professional Privilege, Disclosure Orders
Civil Procedure Evidence Without Prejudice Communications Legal Professional Privilege Disclosure Orders

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CIBC Mellon Trust Co & Another

Claimants/applicants

Wolfgang Otto Stolzenberg & Others

Defendants/respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (with Appeal to Follow If Granted) From a Chancery Division Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants can rely on information obtained during a without prejudice meeting to seek disclosure from solicitors (Withers) regarding the beneficial ownership of Yosaly Investments Inc.
  2. 2 Whether subsequent correspondence and witness statements provide independent grounds for the application, separate from the privileged meeting

Ratio Decidendi

The application for disclosure was fundamentally based on information obtained during a without prejudice meeting, and the claimants could not circumvent this privilege by relying on subsequent correspondence or witness statements that were themselves rooted in the privileged meeting. Thus, the application was dismissed as it relied on inadmissible evidence.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Application dismissed with costs on the standard basis, subject to detailed assessment.
  • Payment on account of £7,000 within 21 days.