Following the recent decision by the English Court of Appeal in SFO v ENRC (subject of this Legal Update) in relation to principles governing litigation privilege, the English High Court last week handed down a decision in Sotheby's v Weiss and others [2018] EWHC 3179 in which the "dominant purpose" test was applied to determine whether litigation privilege attached to certain correspondence passing between Sotheby's (the auction house and art dealer) and art experts regarding reports prepared in the context of an art dispute. The Court held that the correspondence was not covered by litigation privilege because it could not be said that the documents were created for the dominant purpose of contemplated litigation, even though it was clear litigation was in contemplation at the time and the experts' reports would be used for that litigation. This Legal Update examines the Court's reasoning behind this finding, which may be viewed as a strict application of the dominant purpose test for litigation privilege.
Visit us at mayerbrown.com
Mayer Brown is a global legal services provider comprising legal practices that are separate entities (the "Mayer Brown Practices"). The Mayer Brown Practices are: Mayer Brown LLP and Mayer Brown Europe – Brussels LLP, both limited liability partnerships established in Illinois USA; Mayer Brown International LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated in England and Wales (authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and registered in England and Wales number OC 303359); Mayer Brown, a SELAS established in France; Mayer Brown JSM, a Hong Kong partnership and its associated entities in Asia; and Tauil & Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with which Mayer Brown is associated. "Mayer Brown" and the Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of the Mayer Brown Practices in their respective jurisdictions.
© Copyright 2018. The Mayer Brown Practices. All rights reserved.
This Mayer Brown article provides information and comments on legal issues and developments of interest. The foregoing is not a comprehensive treatment of the subject matter covered and is not intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to the matters discussed herein.