Three Rivers No. 5

From The Jolly Contrarian
Revision as of 10:36, 22 January 2018 by Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{cite|Three Rivers District Council|Bank of England (No. 5)|2003|EWHC|A2565}} is a controversial decision of the UK Court of Appeal about {{t|legal privilege}}. [http://www....")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Three Rivers District Council v Bank of England (No. 5) [2003] EWHC A2565 is a controversial decision of the UK Court of Appeal about legal privilege.

Judgment

The Bank of England claimed legal professional privilege for documents created between BCCI’s collapse and the Bank’s final submissions to the Bingham Inquiry.

The Bank does not claim they were prepared in contemplation of litigation and so are thereby protected by “litigation privilege”; the Bank claims they protected by simple "legal advice privilege" — privilege relating to legal advice not provided contemplation of litigation.