Astex Therapeutics Ltd v Astrazeneca AB [2016] EWHC 2759 (Ch) (08 November 2016)

Astex Therapeutics Ltd v Astrazeneca AB [2016] EWHC 2759 (Ch) (08 November 2016)

AstraZeneca is not entitled to claim legal advice privilege over attendance notes of conversations with employees and ex-employees who are not part of the client group authorised to instruct lawyers. The claim to litigation privilege is inadequately supported by evidence as to when litigation was contemplated and the dominant purpose of the documents. Further, AstraZeneca's claim to privilege is insufficiently particularised and must be clarified by a proper officer of the company.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 2759 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Astex Therapeutics Limited; Defendant: AstraZeneca AB
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 November 2016
Procedural Posture
High Court Chancery Division / Interlocutory Application Regarding Disclosure and Privilege
Outcome
Application granted in part
Legal Topics
Legal Professional Privilege, Disclosure of Documents, Litigation Privilege, Legal Advice Privilege, Corporate Client Communications
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Legal Professional Privilege Disclosure of Documents Litigation Privilege Legal Advice Privilege Corporate Client Communications

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Astex Therapeutics Limited

Claimant

AstraZeneca AB

Defendant

Procedural Posture

High Court Chancery Division / Interlocutory Application Regarding Disclosure and Privilege

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether AstraZeneca is entitled to claim legal advice privilege and/or litigation privilege over attendance notes of conversations with current and former employees
  2. 2 Whether the claim to privilege has been properly particularised and justified under CPR 31.19
  3. 3 Whether the court should order AstraZeneca to provide a detailed list and explanation of documents over which privilege is claimed

Ratio Decidendi

AstraZeneca is not entitled to claim legal advice privilege over attendance notes of conversations with employees and ex-employees who are not part of the client group authorised to instruct lawyers. The claim to litigation privilege is inadequately supported by evidence as to when litigation was contemplated and the dominant purpose of the documents. Further, AstraZeneca's claim to privilege is insufficiently particularised and must be clarified by a proper officer of the company.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part

Orders

  • AstraZeneca must provide a witness statement by a proper officer detailing the documents over which privilege is claimed, the dates of creation, the employees/ex-employees involved, and the basis for each claim to privilege, distinguishing between legal advice and litigation privilege.