[2006] EWCA Civ 1866, 21 December 2006. Considered whether an expert joint statement ordered for the purpose of mediation could be used for another purpose. Respondent C issued proceedings for negligence and breach of duty against appellant P who was employed to provide architect services. The proceedings were stayed for mediation and experts were instructed to prepare a joint statement. A draft joint statement stated to be without prejudice was prepared by the experts but the final joint statement removed the without prejudice statement. When the mediation failed, P tried to use the joint statement in subsequent proceedings on the basis that it was ordered by the court pursuant to the Civil Procedure Rules Part 35.12. C contended that the joint statement was ordered for the mediation and was therefore privileged and the judge upheld this view. P appealed. "Held": appeal allowed. The statement was a joint statement made pursuant to the Civil Procedure Rules Part 35.12 and was not privileged. It therefore did not acquire without prejudice status because it was used in mediation.