Horgan v. Murray [1998] IEHC 149; [1999] 1 ILRM 257 (9th October, 1998)

Horgan v. Murray [1998] IEHC 149; [1999] 1 ILRM 257 (9th October, 1998)

Advices given to the companies are within the Respondents' power and must be discovered unless privileged. Documents prepared for the purpose of litigation, including settlement negotiations, are privileged. Notes prepared for the purpose of taking legal advice are privileged if their purpose is clear.

Citation
[1999] 1 ILRM 257
Parties
Petitioner: Petitioner; Respondent: Respondents
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Procedural Posture
Section 205 Petition / Discovery Motions
Outcome
Discovery granted in part; privilege upheld for certain documents.
Legal Topics
Discovery, Privilege, Oppression of Minority Shareholder, Settlement Negotiations

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Petitioner

Petitioner

Respondents

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Section 205 Petition / Discovery Motions

  1. 1 Whether advices given to the companies by third party advisors are discoverable by the Respondents
  2. 2 Whether documents prepared for settlement negotiations are privileged
  3. 3 Whether notes prepared by the Petitioner for legal advice are privileged

Ratio Decidendi

Advices given to the companies are within the Respondents' power and must be discovered unless privileged. Documents prepared for the purpose of litigation, including settlement negotiations, are privileged. Notes prepared for the purpose of taking legal advice are privileged if their purpose is clear.

Court Disposition

Discovery granted in part; privilege upheld for certain documents.

Orders

  • Respondents must refer to and produce relevant advices given to the companies unless privileged.
  • Documents prepared for settlement negotiations and notes for legal advice are privileged unless doubt exists, in which case the Court will review.