Whiffen v Hartwright: 15 Apr 1848

The court refused to order the production of letters which had passed ‘without prejudice’. Lord Langdale MR observed that he ‘did not see how the plaintiff could get over this express agreement, though he did not agree, that the right of discovery was limited to the use which could be made of it in evidence.’ Production can be ordered of documents even though they may not be admissible in evidence.

Judges:

Lord Langdale MR

Citations:

[1848] EngR 406 (A), (1848) 11 Beav 111

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRabin v Mendoza and Co CA 1954
The plaintiffs sued the defendants for negligence in surveying a property. Before the action commenced a meeting had taken place between the plaintiffs’ solicitor and a partner in the defendants’ firm of surveyors to see if the matter could be . .
CitedOfulue and Another v Bossert HL 11-Mar-2009
The parties disputed ownership of land, one claiming adverse possession. In the course of negotations, the possessor made a without prejudice offer to purchase the paper owner’s title. The paper owner claimed that this was an acknowledgement under . .
CitedOfulue and Another v Bossert HL 11-Mar-2009
The parties disputed ownership of land, one claiming adverse possession. In the course of negotations, the possessor made a without prejudice offer to purchase the paper owner’s title. The paper owner claimed that this was an acknowledgement under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.253696