The court was asked as a preliminary question whether two letters are in fact ‘without prejudice’ communications, and whether (even if they are) they should nevertheless be before the court on a forthcoming application.
Held: The test for determining the purpose of marking documents without prejudice is entirely objective and the actual intention of the writer is irrelevant.
Judges:
Crane J
Citations:
[2005] EWHC 636 (QB), [2006] FSR 8
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Avonwick Holdings Ltd v Webinvest Ltd and Another ChD 10-Oct-2014
Application by the claimant that certain correspondence between the parties and their solicitors in April-May 2014 should be admissible as evidence, notwithstanding that most of it was headed ‘without prejudice and subject to contract’. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Litigation Practice
Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.431738