EVIDENCE — client legal privilege — defendant has in-house and external lawyers — external lawyers retained to conduct “independent” investigation and advise board — investigation reveals employee misconduct — external lawyers retain consultant to conduct “independent” workplace investigation — external lawyer’s investigation report later produced to Banking Royal Commission.
PRIVILEGE — difficulty adducing evidence in support of claim due to authors leaving employ — whether Court should inspect documents — principles at [7]-[12] — [name withheld] v [name withheld] does not introduce ‘two-step’ process — exercise discretion to inspect documents.
DOMINANT PURPOSE — principles at [33]-[39] — a purpose was to persuade regulator that defendant was taking the matter seriously — dominant purpose was to provide defendant with legal advice.
WAIVER — principles at [111]-[112] — whether waiver of external legal advice led to waiver of in-house advice — whether waiver over subsequent legal advice — issue waiver — no waiver.
Case Details
Citation[2022] NSWSC 1525
CourtNSWSC
JurisdictionNew South Wales
Unlock so much more with Barrister AI
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 6 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 6 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.
