COURT OF APPEAL DECISION IN ENRC: ORTHODOXY RESTORED ON LITIGATION PRIVILEGE, BUT NARROW INTERPRETATION OF “CLIENT” REMAINS FOR NOW

The Court of Appeal has today handed down its eagerly awaited decision in the ENRC appeal: The Director of the Serious Fraud Office v Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 2006. At first instance, the High Court took a restrictive approach to both litigation privilege and legal advice privilege (see our summary of the decision here). The Court of Appeal has allowed the appeal on the question of litigation privilege but has, with apparent reluctance, dismissed the appeal on legal advice privilege, concluding it is a matter for the Supreme Court. Continue reading

GHOSH DISHONESTY DISAPPROVED: DISHONESTY NOW TO BE ASSESSED SOLELY AGAINST THE STANDARDS OF ORDINARY REASONABLE AND HONEST PEOPLE

The Supreme Court has held that the correct test for dishonesty is whether or not the defendant’s conduct is dishonest by the objective standards of ordinary reasonable and honest people: Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd t/a Crockfords [2017] UKSC 67. Albeit that the Court did not need to rule on the point, the judgment would remove the second limb of the previous two-phase objective and subjective test for dishonesty as set out in R v Ghosh [1982] QB 1053. The Court also concluded that the tests for dishonesty in criminal and civil proceedings should be the same. Please click here for our full briefing on the case.