Waugh v British Railways Board
1980 · AC 521
Posted By lanbuk.com
- Facts
- A locomotive driver died in a collision between two trains. His widow sued the board. An internal report into the accident had been prepared for two purposes: railway operation and safety, and the legal advice the board would need if it was sued. She sought disclosure. The board claimed .
- Issue
- Is a document privileged if litigation is one purpose of making it, but not the dominant purpose?
- Held
- No. The House of Lords ordered production. Privilege attaches only if the dominant purpose of the document was submission to a legal adviser for use in litigation that was pending or reasonably in prospect.
- Principle
- The dominant-purpose test governs litigation privilege. A dual purpose, in which operation or safety weighs at least as heavily as the litigation, is not enough.
- Why it matters
- Wheeler v Le Marchant is the older case beside it. Reports obtained when litigation is not contemplated are not privileged.
Words and Latin in this note
- Legal professional privilege
- A client's right not to disclose confidential communications with a lawyer for the purpose of legal advice, or documents made for the dominant purpose of litigation. It belongs to the client. Crime and fraud are outside it. Open the note.
For study only. By lanbuk.com. Always check current sources and consult a qualified professional.