header-logo header-logo

Privilege without prejudice

20 June 2019 / Tony Allen
Issue: 7845 / Categories: Features , Profession , ADR , Mediation
printer mail-detail

Mediators will be pleased to find judges taking the broad view of ‘without prejudice’ privilege, says Tony Allen

  • ‘Without prejudice’ privilege implications for mediation: Willers v Joyce and others, and Briggs v Clay and others

Mediators always reassure parties that what happens in a mediation remains inaccessible to a court—both if the claim does not settle, but also when it does. ‘Without prejudice’ (WP) privilege applies automatically to what transpires during mediations, as it does to any genuine settlement discussions. The privilege belongs to the parties only, and the mediator has no right to prevent parties from choosing to waive that. Some case law has suggested that contractual confidentiality created when a mediation agreement is signed also protects mediation exchanges from exposure in court (and anywhere else) and that the mediator too can invoke a remedy for breach besides the parties.

Recent cases in the Business and Property Courts have revisited the limits of WP protection. One—Willers v Joyce and others [2019] EWHC 937 (Ch)—looks specifically at the aftermath

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

Gilson Gray—Paul Madden

Gilson Gray—Paul Madden

Partner appointed to head international insolvency and dispute resolution for England

Brachers—Gill Turner Tucker

Brachers—Gill Turner Tucker

Kent firm expands regional footprint through strategic acquisition

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—William Charles

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—William Charles

Financial disputes and investigations specialist joins as partner in London

NEWS
Ministers’ proposals to raise funds by seizing interest on lawyers’ client account schemes could ‘cause firms to close’, solicitors have warned
Pension sharing orders (PSOs) have quietly reached their 25th anniversary, yet remain stubbornly underused. Writing in NLJ this week, Joanna Newton of Stowe Family Law argues that this neglect risks long-term financial harm, particularly for women
A school ski trip, a confiscated phone and an unauthorised hotel-room entry culminated in a pupil’s permanent exclusion. In this week's issue of NLJ, Nicholas Dobson charts how the Court of Appeal upheld the decision despite acknowledged procedural flaws
Is a suspect’s state of mind a ‘fact’ capable of triggering adverse inferences? Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Smith of Corker Binning examines how R v Leslie reshapes the debate
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
back-to-top-scroll