UK: Privilege in the Context of Construction Claims: A Refresher and Warnings

Last Updated: 3 July 2017
Article by Claire King

In this month's Insight we review some of the basics in respect of privilege so far as it pertains to construction claims including adjudications. As those who have had to go through the painful process of disclosure will be acutely aware, communications can, of course, be confidential without being privileged. This will mean that once court proceedings or arbitration proceedings are started, "confidential" documents that do not attract privilege may well have to be disclosed. In the era of the email this can, unfortunately, be forgotten far too easily.

We look at some of the traps the unwary can fall into, before setting out some practical tips for attracting, and not waiving, privilege1

The basics: an overview

There are three broad types of privilege which we will examine in this Insight. These are namely:

  1. Legal Advice Privilege;
  2. Litigation Privilege; and
  3. Without Prejudice Privilege.

The first two types fall within the broader category of Legal Professional Privilege. All three types give a right to resist the compulsory disclosure of information in certain circumstances.2

Legal Advice Privilege was defined by the House of Lords in the Three Rivers case as:

"Communications between lawyers and their clients whereby legal advice is sought or given."3 [Emphasis added]

It is a matter of public policy that a client should be able to communicate openly and confidentially with their legal advisers. Non-lawyers do NOT attract legal advice privilege unless there is a specific statutory provision providing for it (as to which see further below).4

As stated in Anderson v Bank of British Columbia:

"it is equally necessary, to use a vulgar phrase, that he should be able to make a clean breast of it to the gentleman whom he consults with a view to the prosecution of his claim..."5 [Emphasis added]

If a client can freely unburden themselves to their lawyers, warts and all, their lawyers can give honest and candid advice as to the merits of their client's claim without the risk of it later being used as a weapon against them by the other side.6 This is in the public interest because it should mean hopeless cases settle earlier without reaching the courts.

Litigation Privilege is a wider privilege which can extend to third parties (i.e. those other than the client and their lawyer) but only in defined circumstances. In the House of Lords defined litigation privilege as:

"Communications between a lawyer or the lawyer's client and a third party or to any document brought into existence for the dominant purpose of being used in litigation." 7 [Emphasis added]

The tests a communication (written or oral) must pass in order for a document to be covered by litigation privilege are:

  1. It must be between: (i) a client or (ii) his lawyer (who is acting for him in a professional capacity) and a third party;
  2. In either case under conditions of confidentiality;
  3. For the dominant purpose of use in litigation that is either in reasonable contemplation or under way; and
  4. For the purpose of either: (i) enabling legal advice to be sought or given; and/or (ii) seeking or obtaining evidence or information to be used in or in connection with the litigation concerned.8

Finally, Without Prejudice Privilege was defined in the case of Rush & Tompkins v Greater London Council9 as applying:

"To exclude all negotiations genuinely aimed at settlement whether oral or in writing from being given in evidence." [Emphasis added]

The key words here are "genuinely aimed at settlement". The underlying purpose of a document expressed to be "without prejudice" must always be examined. Blanket application of the label to correspondence is not sufficient to attract this type of privilege.

With these basics in mind, we now examine some of the issues that are particularly pertinent for construction claims, including:

  1. How privilege works where there are non-lawyers or non-practising lawyers involved in the claims process;
  2. Whether adjudication constitutes "litigation" in the context of litigation privilege; and
  3. Without prejudice communications in the context of adjudication.

Privilege for non-lawyers and non-practising lawyers?

It is not unusual for non-lawyers (often quantity surveyors) or non-practising lawyers to be used by contractors and subcontractors to compile their claims early doors. These may later be taken to adjudication and, if that doesn't work, ultimately litigation or arbitration. Quasi-legal advice is often provided as part of this process.

It is important for those non-lawyers and their clients, especially those without the benefit of in-house counsel or external legal advice, to be aware that communications with them about the claims will not attract legal advice privilege.

The Supreme Court decision of R (Prudential Plc and another) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax [2013] 10 confirmed that only members of the legal profession are entitled to rely on legal advice privilege.

In that case, the claimant had obtained advice from tax advisers in relation to questions of tax law on a proposed transaction. Those advisers sought to claim privilege. The Court of Appeal judgment (upheld by the Supreme Court) held:

"I would conclude that it is not open to the Court to hold that LLP applies outside the legal profession, except as a result of relevant statutory provisions. It is the essence of the rule that it should be clear in its application. Since it is not the subject of any ad hoc balancing exercise but is, to all intents and purposes, absolute. As applied to members of the legal professions, acting as such, it is sufficiently clear and certain. If it were to apply to members of other professions who give advice on points of law in the course of their professional activity, serious questions would arise as to its scope and application." 11 [Emphasis added]

"So what?" you may ask

Well a classic example of the practical implications of privilege not applying can be seen in the infamous case of Walter Lilly & Co. Ltd v Mackay [2012].12

In this case, the claimants retained construction claims consultants to assist with bringing a claim against the defendant. Some of their advice on programming was disclosed during the lengthy court proceedings but other parts of their advice were not and legal advice privilege was claimed.

Akenhead J held that legal advice privilege did not apply. It was noted that the terms of business used expressly stated that the consultants in question were not providing legal advice, it was unclear whether those advising were actually lawyers and the terms and conditions stated that if legal advice was required the consultant would source it from outside its organisation.

Akenhead J explained:

"It does not hold itself out as a firm of solicitors or group of barristers, albeit that it employs some lawyers. It was retained to provide 'contractual and adjudication advice'. It is notable that it was not retained to provide legal advice as such."13 [Emphasis added]

The practical ramifications of this are clear. If no lawyers are involved and a consultant advises that your claims have no hope of succeeding, or perhaps advises you to maximise the quantum of a claim in order to try and get a good deal, such a communication would not be privileged. If the dispute progressed to court it then becomes disclosable. At that stage it may have a very negative impact on your position, even if the contents of the "advice" were wrong. Clearly you do not want to put yourself in this position.

Is adjudication "litigation" for the purposes of claiming litigation privilege?

Litigation privilege is important because, where the tests set out above are met, it protects communications with third parties such as experts and witnesses.

There does not appear to be any direct English law authority on whether adjudication counts as "litigation". Generally speaking the test for "litigation", in the context of litigation privilege, is based upon there being an adversarial process.14 As everyone involved in adjudications can attest, they are certainly adversarial.

Helpfully, the Australian case of Dura (Australia) Constructions Pty Ltd v Hue Boutique Living Pty Ltd [2011]15 held that documents created for the purpose of adjudication proceedings were able to benefit from litigation privilege. Macaulay J held:

"Despite the fact that the adjudication may not ultimately determine the parties' rights if, in a subsequent court proceeding, the parties' entitlements are litigated, the adjudication result is enforceable at law and is binding upon the parties unless and until a subsequent court order changes the outcome. I think that the nature of adjudications is such that preserving the confidentiality of communications, made for the dominant purpose of enabling the provision of legal services to participants in the adjudication, would promote the object of fairness for and between those participants."16

It is likely then that adjudication will qualify as "litigation" for the purposes of litigation privilege. That does not, however, provide blanket protection.

Key points to keep in mind include:

  1. You still need practising lawyers for litigation privilege to kick in. Claiming privilege for third party communications before a solicitor is appointed may well be problematic.17 Likewise there is some suggestion that non-lawyers providing litigation support in a practical capacity may possibly attract litigation privilege, but this is by no means certain and has not been tested in the context of quantity surveyors so far as we are aware. 18
  2. Privilege (both advice and litigation privilege) can easily be waived. Communications which are circulated too widely, including within an organisation, may lose the confidentiality required to allow privilege to apply. 19 In Three Rivers (No. 5) (which related to advice privilege), 20 the Court of Appeal gave a very restrictive definition of client and held it would only cover communications between the lawyer and a small group of the bank's employees actually charged with instructing the bank's lawyers. "Client" would not cover everyone in the company. This risk may not be as significant with litigation privilege but the moral is still clear: think before you forward.
  3. Think before you involve third parties. Is litigation really contemplated and what is the dominant purpose behind the communication? Does it pass the dominant purpose test?

Whilst in the vast majority of cases adjudications will resolve a dispute, some disputes do inevitably progress to court or arbitration (as applicable). Protecting yourself by keeping documents produced at an earlier stage of the development of a claim privileged is always going to be sensible in case the worst happens.

Without prejudice communications in adjudication

The final type of privilege we will look at ("without prejudice") is perhaps the most often claimed by laymen. When used properly it means that "without prejudice" cannot be referred to in open correspondence (and hence it will be hidden from a tribunal at a later date). However, in the context of adjudication, without prejudice privilege is too often ignored.

In Volker Stevin Ltd v Holystone Contracts Ltd [2010] 21 the Judge considered whether an adjudicator's knowledge of a without prejudice offer by Holystone made his decision towards Volker biased. Coulson J, in this case, held that knowledge of the without prejudice offer did not make the adjudicator biased towards Volker and was in no doubt that a fair-minded observer would not reach a conclusion of bias.

This issue arose again in Ellis Building Contractors Ltd v Vincent Goldstein [2011], 22 which related to without prejudice documents being submitted to the adjudicator. In this case, Goldstein's solicitors sent a without prejudice letter to Ellis after receiving the notice of adjudication offering a settlement sum. Ellis referred to the letter in their Reply but did redact the sum offered by Goldstein. The Judge enforced the adjudicator's decision and held that there was not a legitimate fear of lack of impartiality.

Akenhead J went on to suggest that such actions could result in the possibility of professional disciplinary action for lawyers who submitted such material. The problem in adjudication is obviously that often lawyers are not involved so no such disciplinary threat sits over those making such disclosures.

Some practical tips

Finally, some practical tips for those involved in construction claims, particularly in their early stages:

  1. Instruct lawyers (external or internal) to maximise your chances of claiming privilege on claims documentation. In-house lawyers will not attract privilege unless they are providing legal advice or litigation privilege applies, but their involvement may arguably itself signal that litigation is likely.
  2. Keep lawyers copied into communications especially where they are particularly sensitive. This will also give the lawyers a chance to raise an issue if there is a problem regarding privilege.
  3. Do not inadvertently waive privilege. Keep communications tightly restricted within a limited and clearly defined team and mark them as privilege and confidential.
  4. Think carefully about the purpose of any sensitive communication before it is sent. Do you need to send it? Is its purpose to obtain legal advice or to collect information for litigation which is reasonably contemplated (if it hasn't started)? If you have a view on prospects but there are no lawyers involved, perhaps pick up the phone rather than emailing that view for all to see in future years.

Footnotes

1 It should be noted that this article does not purport to provide a comprehensive overview of privilege which is, by definition, a complex area of law. If in doubt as to the status of any communication (or proposed communication), specific advice should be sought.

2 See Hodge M. Malek QC et al., Phipson on Evidence, 18th edn (Sweet and Maxwell), 2013, chapter 23-01, quoting from Lord Millett in B v Auckland District Law Society [2003] AC 736.

3 Three Rivers District Council and Others v Governor and Company of the Bank of England [2004] UK HL 48, para 10.

4 See Malek et al., Phipson on Evidence, chapter 23-34.

5 Anderson v Bank of British Columbia (1875-1876) LR 2 Ch. D. 644, 649. See also Phipson on Evidence for a more detailed history of the purpose behind Legal Professional Privilege.

6 See Bingham LJ in Ventouris v Mountain [1991] WLR 607.

7 Three Rivers District Council and Others v Bank of England [2004], para 27.

8 [8] See Colin Passmore, Privilege, 3rd edn (Sweet & Maxwell), chapter 3-005.

9 [1986] AC 1280.

10 UKSC 1.

11 R (Prudential plc and another) v Special Commissioners of Income Tax [2010] EWCA civ 1094, para 83.

12 EWHC 649 (TCC).

13 Walter Lilly & Co. Ltd v Hackay & DMW Developments Limited [2012] EWHC 649 (TCC) at para 15.

14 See Passmore, Privilege, chapter 3-087.

15 VSC H77.

16 Dura (Australia) Constructions Pty Ltd v Hue Boutique Living Pty Ltd [2011] VSC 477, para 49.

17 Re Barings PLC and Others, Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Baker and Others [1998] 1 All ER 673 arguably means that a litigation in person may not have the benefit of making a privileged communication with a third party (see Passmore, Privilege for a detailed discussion at chapter 3-029 et seq). Equally this case may also render it difficult to claim litigation privilege before a solicitor is instructed.

18 See R (on the application of Prudential PLC and another) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax and another [2013] UKSC 1.

19 See Shepherd v Fox Williams LLP and others [2014] where the claimant sent highly confidential documents to his girlfriend's personal email address. She subsequently forwarded them to her work address. The court, in this instance, held that privilege had been waived because the document was created for a privileged reason and therefore disclosed for a limited purpose, which was not to be disclosed to someone outside the dispute.

20 Three Rivers District Council and others v The Governor and Company of the Bank of England Rev 1[2003] EWCA Civ 474.

21 EWHC 2344 (TCC).

22 EWHC 269 (TCC).

* With thanks to Laura Bowler and Stacy Sinclair for their assistance.


Please click here to view previous issues of Insight


The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Claire King
 
In association with
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.