The important issue of disclosure of documents in the context of litigation before the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) was recently considered in Peter A D Fisher, Stephen D Fisher and Anne P Fisher v HMRC 2012 UKFTT 335.
The important issue of disclosure of documents in the context of litigation before the First-tier Tribunal (Tax) (‘the FTT’) was recently considered in Peter A D Fisher, Stephen D Fisher and Anne P Fisher v HMRC.
One interesting issue arising from the much publicised Berezovsky and Abramovich litigation, currently before the English court, is the extent to which it is possible to retain privilege over, or otherwise restrict the use of, documents that have been disclosed to third parties.
A High Court Judge has heavily criticised the FSA’s use of legally privileged material in an enforcement action in circumstances where the individual concerned was never informed that such material would be used, much less consulted as to whether he waived privilege.
The much-publicised litigation involving Russian magnates Boris Berezovsky and Roman Abramovich has shed light on the extent to which it is possible to retain privilege over, or otherwise restrict the use of, documents that have been disclosed to third parties.
As tax practitioners will be aware, HMRC’s Litigation and Settlement Strategy (‘LSS’) is the framework within which HMRC seeks to resolve tax disputes through civil procedures.
Two recent decisions on wasted costs applications confirm that the courts will only rarely make a wasted costs order against solicitors and highlight the potential costs consequences for a party that inappropriately seeks such an order.
The claimant lender, Mortgage Express, sought production of a number of files of a predecessor firm (the firm) of the defendant solicitor, where the firm had acted for both Mortgage Express and its borrowers.
In November 2010 the Court of Appeal (Mummery LJ, Morgan J and Sir Paul Kennedy) dismissed an appeal against a High Court ruling allowing the Believe songwriters automatic reversion of their copyright following a material breach of contract by their publishers.
In BBGP v Babcock, the High Court held that the defendant limited partnership (Global) could not assert legal professional privilege against its former managing partner (General) where there was evidence of iniquity.