Curless v Shell International Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 1710

Leaked email covered by legal advice privilege and not tainted by overheard social conversation

The issue in this appeal concerned whether the ET was correct to order on a preliminary hearing that two paragraphs of the disability discrimination and victimisation claim of Mr Curless should be struck out on the ground that they referred to respectively an email and a conversation in respect of which Shell was entitled to claim legal advice privilege (LAP).

The full content of this page is available to subscribers only. Please purchase a subscription if you feel this content will be of use to you.

Login or subscribe (includes subscription information) to access the full content of this page.