Aird & Anor v Prime Meridian Ltd

Aird & Anor v Prime Meridian Ltd

On the specific facts, the joint expert statement was privileged as it was prepared primarily for mediation, and there was no clear and unequivocal waiver of privilege. Mere inconsistency between the statement and later pleadings does not amount to an abuse of privilege or unambiguous impropriety.

Parties
Claimant: Robert Aird; Claimant: Karen Aird; Defendant: Prime Meridian Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 September 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment on Application Regarding Privilege of Expert Statement
Outcome
Defendants' application dismissed
Legal Topics
Without Prejudice Privilege, Mediation, Expert Evidence, Case Management

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Aird

Claimant

Karen Aird

Claimant

Prime Meridian Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment on Application Regarding Privilege of Expert Statement

  1. 1 Whether a joint expert statement prepared for mediation is privileged and inadmissible in subsequent litigation
  2. 2 Whether inconsistency between the statement and later pleadings constitutes an abuse of privilege

Ratio Decidendi

On the specific facts, the joint expert statement was privileged as it was prepared primarily for mediation, and there was no clear and unequivocal waiver of privilege. Mere inconsistency between the statement and later pleadings does not amount to an abuse of privilege or unambiguous impropriety.

Court Disposition

Defendants' application dismissed

Orders

  • The statement is privileged and cannot be referred to in the proceedings unless both sides agree.
  • Defendants to pay Claimants 80% of their costs, summarily assessed at £9,500.