Rush and Tompkins Ltd v GLC and Carey Plant Hire (Oval) Ltd
Rush and Tompkins Ltd v GLC and Carey Plant Hire (Oval) Ltd
- 1988
- New Law Journal 138(6382) 11 November 1988, 315-316(2) .
HL 2 November 1988 Rush and Tompkins (R) entered into a contract with the GLC for the construction of houses and engaged Careys (C) as subcontractor . A dispute arose between the parties and R issued proceedings against GLC and C. This was settled by payment of £1.2m by GLC and R discontinued its action. C then applied for discovery of the " without prejudice " correspondence which passed between R and GLC leading up to the settlement. R claimed that the correspondence was protected from disclosure. This was upheld by ORC and C appealed to CA who held that the protection given by the "without prejudice" rule ceased once a dispute had been settled. On appeal by C, HL held that "without prejudice" correspondence entered into with the object of reaching a compromise of an action remains privileged after the compromise has been reached and accordingly the correspondence is inadmissable in any subsequent litigation connected with the subject matter whether by the same or different parties
BUILT ENVIRONMENT-BUILDING CONTRACT FORMS
DOCUMENTS
HL 2 November 1988 Rush and Tompkins (R) entered into a contract with the GLC for the construction of houses and engaged Careys (C) as subcontractor . A dispute arose between the parties and R issued proceedings against GLC and C. This was settled by payment of £1.2m by GLC and R discontinued its action. C then applied for discovery of the " without prejudice " correspondence which passed between R and GLC leading up to the settlement. R claimed that the correspondence was protected from disclosure. This was upheld by ORC and C appealed to CA who held that the protection given by the "without prejudice" rule ceased once a dispute had been settled. On appeal by C, HL held that "without prejudice" correspondence entered into with the object of reaching a compromise of an action remains privileged after the compromise has been reached and accordingly the correspondence is inadmissable in any subsequent litigation connected with the subject matter whether by the same or different parties
BUILT ENVIRONMENT-BUILDING CONTRACT FORMS
DOCUMENTS