A court may inspect documents under s 133 of the Evidence Act to determine privilege even where the evidence filed in support of the claim is manifestly inadequate, though parties are warned that failure to file adequate evidence and comply with the rules may have significant adverse consequences. The disclosure of a redacted version of a document in answer to interrogatories does not waive privilege over the redacted parts where the disclosure was properly confined and does not create inconsistency with the maintenance of confidentiality. An objection to answering an interrogatory on the ground that the answer could disclose privileged information may be taken at the time the answer is called for, not only when the order to answer is made. The prosecutorial duty of disclosure does not require loss of privilege in subsequent civil proceedings where the communications were privileged from the time they came into existence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 48 later cases that cite this judgment.
7 of the 48 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.