header-logo header-logo

Iniquity, privilege & an unwise conversation in the pub

22 November 2019 / Charles Pigott
Issue: 7865 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail
11896
Charles Pigott reflects on Curless & the complexities of addressing discrimination claims in the context of a wider redundancy programme
  • The Court of Appeal has ruled that Shell could claim privilege in an e-mail giving legal advice about dealing with a discrimination claim in the context of a wider redundancy programme
  • It took a different view from the Employment Appeal Tribunal, which ruled last year that privilege could not be claimed, because the advice had been given ‘for the purpose of facilitating an iniquity’.

The Court of Appeal’s decision in Curless v Shell International Limited [2019] EWCA Civ 1710, [2019] All ER (D) 137 (Oct) touches on a subject that is commonly encountered by employment lawyers when advising on implementing a redundancy programme.

What happened?

In this case Michael Curless had been employed as a senior legal counsel by Shell. He has Type 2 diabetes and obstructive sleep apnoea. There had been long-standing concerns about his performance. He had made complaints about disability discrimination and had

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

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll