header-logo header-logo

28 March 2014 / Michael Salter , Chris Bryden
Issue: 7600 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Distilling the principles

web_brydensalter

Michael Salter & Chris Bryden re-examine the without prejudice rule

The vexed issue of the without prejudice rule and its applicability to employment situations has again arisen at appellate level. The case of Portnykh v Nomura International plc [2014] IRLR 251, [2014] All ER (D) 52 (Jan) (judgment handed down on 5 November 2013, but embargoed until the conclusion of the hearing proper to avoid prejudice) considers both the issue of when there is a dispute, so as to engage the without prejudice rule, and also the question of the applicability of the “unambiguous impropriety” exception. The judgment of His Honour Judge Hand QC contains a thorough analysis of the applicable law and is well worth reading in full.

 

Communications

Without prejudice communications between the parties are prima facie not admissible before the tribunal unless both parties agree, or where admission is required to prove the existence of an agreement, or where non-disclosure would amount to the concealment of unambiguous impropriety or otherwise allow a dishonest case to be advanced.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll