header-logo header-logo

28 October 2011
Issue: 7487 / Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

Privilege—Legal professional privilege—Documents

R (on the application of Ford) v Financial Services Authority [2011] EWHC 2583 (Admin), [2011] All ER (D) 140 (Oct)

Queen’s Bench Division, Administrative Court, Burnett J, 11 Oct 2011

The High Court has reviewed the principles applicable to joint interest legal privilege.

Hodge Malek QC and Saima Hanif (instructed by Withers LLP) for the claimant. Bankim Thanki QC and Andrew George (instructed by the FSA) for the defendant. The interested parties appeared in person.

The claimant and the first interested party (the executives) were directors of a company, Keydata. The second interested party was its compliance officer. A firm of solicitors, Irwin Mitchell, were retained in December 2007 by Keydata to advise in connection with an investigation by the defendant Financial Services Authority (FSA). It was common ground that the legal advice provided by Irwin Mitchell was privileged in the hands of Keydata. The executives believed, however, that Irwin Mitchell were also advising them as individuals and not simply as directors and officers of Keydata. In due course the FSA did

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Should a conviction stand when a later ruling reveals that the law underpinning it was wrong? The answer exposes a clash between finality and justice
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
back-to-top-scroll