RBS Rights Issue Litigation: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) m Amwelladmin moved page RBS Rights Issue Litigation v - Case Note to RBS Rights Issue Litigation - Case Note |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
*{{casenote|SFO|ENRC}} | *{{casenote|SFO|ENRC}} | ||
*{{casenote|Three Rivers No. 5|}} | *{{casenote|Three Rivers No. 5|}} | ||
*[[privilege]] | |||
Revision as of 13:18, 3 October 2017
High Court has applied the much-criticised Court of Appeal decision in Three Rivers No 5 to find that interviews conducted by a bank's solicitors with its employees were not covered by legal advice privilege, as the employees in question did not form part of the "client" for privilege purposes