Enigma Diagnostics Limited (in liquidation) & Ors v Harvey Boulter & Ors

Enigma Diagnostics Limited (in liquidation) & Ors v Harvey Boulter & Ors

The evidence establishes a compelling prima facie case that PCL, using DLA Piper's services, misled investors as to the destination of their funds, amounting to iniquity. Therefore, legal professional privilege does not apply to the relevant communications, and disclosure is ordered.

Parties
Claimant: Enigma Diagnostics Limited (In Liquidation); Claimant: Paul David Allen; Claimant: Geoffrey Lambert Carton-Kelly; Defendant: Harvey Boulter; Defendant: DLA Piper UK LLP; Defendant: Charles Cook
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application for Disclosure and Privilege Determination
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Legal Professional Privilege, Iniquity Exception, Fraud, Disclosure of Documents
Civil Procedure Company Law Equity and Trusts Legal Professional Privilege Iniquity Exception Fraud Disclosure of Documents

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Enigma Diagnostics Limited (In Liquidation)

Claimant

Paul David Allen

Claimant

Geoffrey Lambert Carton-Kelly

Claimant

Harvey Boulter

Defendant

DLA Piper UK LLP

Defendant

Charles Cook

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application for Disclosure and Privilege Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether legal professional privilege applies to communications between DLA Piper and Porton Capital Limited and its group companies in light of alleged iniquity
  2. 2 Whether the iniquity exception to privilege is established by the evidence of fraud on investors

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence establishes a compelling prima facie case that PCL, using DLA Piper's services, misled investors as to the destination of their funds, amounting to iniquity. Therefore, legal professional privilege does not apply to the relevant communications, and disclosure is ordered.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • There is no legal professional privilege in respect of communications between DLA Piper and Porton Capital Limited and its group companies relating to the relevant investment schemes.
  • The Second and Third Defendants are to provide disclosure and inspection of all documents or notes of communications passing between DLA Piper and Porton and/or between either of them and Porton Portfolio Companies and/or actual or potential investors in the relevant schemes between 4 May 2004 and 29 July 2015.