JFSC v AP Black J Ltd and Ors [2003] JRC 194 (28 October 2003)

JFSC v AP Black J Ltd and Ors [2003] JRC 194 (28 October 2003)

There was no waiver of privilege in the legal opinions because the draft report referencing them was withdrawn before any use was made of it in court, at the instigation of the applicant, and no advantage accrued to the Commission. The approach to waiver is flexible and based on fairness, not mechanistic rules. Disclosure of the opinions is not necessary for the fair disposal of the issues in the litigation.

Citation
[2003] JRC 194
Parties
Applicant: CATJ; Respondent: The Commission (Representor)
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
28 October 2003
Procedural Posture
Application for Specific Discovery / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Legal Professional Privilege, Waiver of Privilege, Discovery of Documents, Collective Investment Funds (jersey) Law 1988
Civil Procedure Evidence Legal Professional Privilege Waiver of Privilege Discovery of Documents Collective Investment Funds (jersey) Law 1988

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CATJ

Applicant

The Commission (Representor)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Specific Discovery / Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether privilege in legal opinions was waived by their reference in an expert report disclosed to the opposing party
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to specific discovery of privileged legal opinions

Ratio Decidendi

There was no waiver of privilege in the legal opinions because the draft report referencing them was withdrawn before any use was made of it in court, at the instigation of the applicant, and no advantage accrued to the Commission. The approach to waiver is flexible and based on fairness, not mechanistic rules. Disclosure of the opinions is not necessary for the fair disposal of the issues in the litigation.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • Application by CATJ for specific discovery of the legal opinions listed in Category 5 of its summons is dismissed.