You are here: Home Blog Passmore on Privilege
Inviato: 07 June 2019
There are very few instances where statutory powers interfere with a client’s entitlement to assert privilege.
One concerning exception is so-called “technical” abrogations, which are beginning to spread.
Inviato: 17 January 2019
In this blog post Colin Passmore considers Jet2 v CAA, in which Morris J. held that claims for LAP are subject to a dominant purpose test.
Inviato: 04 December 2018
This blog post examines the second of two recent post ENRC decisions on litigation privilege.
This blog post examines the first of two recent post ENRC decisions on litigation privilege.
Inviato: 21 November 2018
Now the fuss over the decision in SFO v ENRC decision has died down, it is worth focussing on comments the Court of Appeal made about the interplay between privilege and Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs).
Ultima consultazione: 19 September 2018 / Inviato: 01 May 2018
The Divisional Court has added support to the proposition that litigation privilege is not available in a criminal context until the prosecution authorities have decided actually to prosecute.
Inviato: 21 August 2018
This post looks at a recent decision which highlights concerns that the threshold required to be reached to invoke the exception is being weakened.
Inviato: 01 March 2018
This blog post considers the common interest privilege issues arising out of the judgment of Andrew Smith J in Accident Exchange Ltd & Anor v McLean & Ors.
Inviato: 02 February 2018
This blog post considers the situation where evidence is sought from a potential witness who owes a duty of confidentiality to another.
Inviato: 29 January 2018
This blog post looks at Accident Exchange Ltd & Anor v McLean & Ors  EWHC 23 (Comm) which examines the crime-fraud exception to privilege in the context of a major motor credit hire fraud.
19 Jul 2019
The Irish regulator has published the findings from its review of closet tracking.
18 Jul 2019
Following a settlement last week the US Federal Trade Commission has imposed a fine of $5bn on Facebook in relation to its privacy law violations in connection with the Cambridge Analytica scandal. The sheer scale of the fine, more than twice the maximum level possible under GDPR, and the market reaction to it raise a number of interesting questions.
We consider why buy-side insureds are starting to request the exclusion of insurers’ subrogation rights against the buyer’s professional advisors. Are concerns that contribution claims might be made against the seller well founded?
© Simmons & Simmons LLP 2019. All rights reserved. Registered in England & Wales Registered Number OC352713
elexica Limited, CityPoint, One Ropemaker Street, London EC2Y 9SS