header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Iniquity, privilege & an unwise conversation in the pub

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
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

Read All
Sponsored by
Freeths—Joe Lythgoe

Freeths—Joe Lythgoe

Corporate director with expertise in creative industries joins mergers and acquisitions team

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Partner hire bolstersprivate capital and global aviation finance offering

Morae—Carla Mendy

Morae—Carla Mendy

Digital and business solutions firm appoints chief operating officer

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Alarm bells over Mazur
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: Jury trial & a constitutional illusion
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
NLJ this week: The rise—and risks—of going private
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
NLJ this week: Human rights disputes push courts to redefine their role
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Debarment orders—shortcut or minefield?
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll