Fadairo v Suit Supply Uk Lime Street Ltd (Practice and Procedure : Admissibility of evidence) [2014] UKEAT 0282_13_1701 (17 January 2014)

Fadairo v Suit Supply Uk Lime Street Ltd (Practice and Procedure : Admissibility of evidence) [2014] UKEAT 0282_13_1701 (17 January 2014)

The Employment Tribunal was entitled to find the disclosure of the privileged email was inadvertent, confidentiality remained as against the Claimant, and the Tribunal correctly concluded it had no discretion to permit use of the email by balancing competing interests; privilege is absolute unless waived or lost by conduct.

Citation
[2014] UKEAT 0282_13_1701
Parties
Appellant: Claimant; Respondent: Respondent
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
17 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Legal Advice Privilege, Confidentiality, Admissibility of Evidence, Case Management Powers, Constructive Dismissal

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claimant

Appellant

Respondent

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in preventing the Claimant from relying on a confidential email subject to legal advice privilege
  2. 2 Whether the disclosure of the email was inadvertent or deliberate
  3. 3 Whether confidentiality was lost as between the Respondent and Claimant

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal was entitled to find the disclosure of the privileged email was inadvertent, confidentiality remained as against the Claimant, and the Tribunal correctly concluded it had no discretion to permit use of the email by balancing competing interests; privilege is absolute unless waived or lost by conduct.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Claimant prohibited from relying on the email of 5 December 2011 or associated correspondence in proceedings