Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The High Court held that legal advice privilege can cover intra-client documents created for the dominant purpose of seeking legal advice.
Aabar Holdings SARL & Ors v Glencore PLC & Ors [2026] EWHC 877 (Comm) (16 April 2026)
The High Court held that legal advice privilege can cover intra-client documents created or exchanged within the client group for the dominant purpose of seeking legal advice.
Baroness Lawrence & Ors v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2026] EWHC 556 (KB) (12 March 2026)
The High Court refused permission for late hearsay materials from Gavin Burrows, but allowed a tightly controlled examination-in-chief of him as a witness.
The Upper Tribunal held that Ms Prestage was qualified as an expert, but her close involvement in the file review process made her conflicted and her report unfair as expert evidence.
Mashal & Ors v Javed & Ors [2025] EWHC 3195 (Ch) (05 December 2025)
The High Court held that a forensic accountant’s report in this case was not expert evidence under CPR Part 35, but mainly a factual summary of documents.
The evidence is admitted because the defendant's expert also possesses an equivalent recording, making the claimant's recording effectively disclosable and negating the unfairness; exclusion would risk injustice to the claimant, who is relatively blameless, and the breach of agreement was not deliberate. Admission is conditional on a further recorded assessment by the claimant's expert, with the recording provided to the defence.
Source excerpt
The Claimant failed to establish a real, rather than fanciful, risk that evidence would be destroyed, concealed, or tampered with by the Defendant or its officers. The Defendant provided credible assurances of preservation. Pre-action interim relief is exceptional and not justified absent imminent proceedings and clear risk. The application is misconceived and refused.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal upheld a murder and wounding conviction, holding that limited bad character evidence was properly admitted and the jury directions were sufficient.
The court allowed only relevant amendments to pleading and struck out generic, irrelevant and disproportionate allegations, including the Ward Allegations, before trial.
The report of the forensic accountant in this case does not constitute expert evidence under CPR Part 35 as it is primarily a summary of factual material and not an exercise of recognised expertise; it is at best hearsay evidence of fact and does not require permission under CPR Part 35.
Source excerpt
Explore more
