header-logo header-logo

Pride & the without prejudice doctrine

01 November 2019 / Nadya Rouben
Issue: 7864 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail
Communications treated as ‘without prejudice’ can be admissible on questions of costs, says Nadya Rouben
  • Without prejudice: the standard position.
  • Attempts to settle: the without prejudice doctrine.
  • A crucial reminder for lawyers communicating for ‘without prejudice’ protection.

When correspondence is marked as ‘without prejudice’, the standard position is that such correspondence is not admissible on the question of costs, except if it has been marked as ‘without prejudice save as to costs’ or if the right to refer to the correspondence in respect of costs has been reserved. However, on 2 July 2019, the High Court held in the case of Sternberg Reed Solicitors v Andrew Paul Harrison [2019] EWHC 2065 (Ch), [2019] Costs LR 1489 that correspondence which appears on its face to be ‘without prejudice’ (even if not expressly marked as such) can be taken into account when considering the question of costs.

Appeal

In this case, the claimant firm of solicitors (Sternberg Reed) was granted permission to appeal against a costs award

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

NLJ Career Profile: Anne-Marie Ottaway, HFW

NLJ Career Profile: Anne-Marie Ottaway, HFW

Anne-Marie Ottaway, partner at HFW, discusses her varied career, including 13 years at the Serious Fraud Office, and making the leap to private practice

Carey Olsen—Arindam Madhuryya

Carey Olsen—Arindam Madhuryya

Corporate and investment funds lawyer promoted to partner in Jersey

Jackson Lees—Jennifer Carr

Jackson Lees—Jennifer Carr

Private family team announces appointment of senior associate

NEWS
The government’s landmark Employment Rights Act 2025 met its pre-Christmas deadline, ushering in sweeping changes to the law
Barristers and advocates in Scotland, England and Wales, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland have urged the government to drop its proposals for judge-only ‘swift courts’ in cases where the sentence is three years or less
The practice guidance on non-molestation orders has been updated and replaced, and guidance issued on protective injunctions
Criminal silk Kirsty Brimelow KC, of Doughty Street Chambers, has taken over the reins at the Bar Council, succeeding family silk Barbara Mills KC
Lawyers have welcomed the government’s long-awaited announcement of legislation to reverse PACCAR but warned plans for light-touch regulation could cause delays
back-to-top-scroll