All your resources at your fingertips.Learn More
(Court of Appeal; Ward, Rimer and Elias LJJ; 14 June 2011)
The mother's first witness statement indicated she did not know how her 6-week-old child received its injuries: After making ex-parte application for a non-molestation injunction, in which she alleged the father had treated her with violence and threatened to kill her, the mother made a statement alleging that she had seen the father injure the child.
The father claimed that the mother's shift in position meant she had waived her legal professional privilege which justified him to seek disclosure of the attendance notes made by her solicitors and counsel at meetings prior to her second witness statement. In a reserved judgement the judge ordered that the mother disclose all contemporaneous notes made by counsel during conferences and all such notes made by her solicitor during their meetings and gave her permission to appeal.
Appeal dismissed. Legal professional privilege had been waived by the mother when she revealed in her second witness statement that her shift in position was as a consequence of advice she was given.
"the principal (monthly) periodical dealing with contemporary issues" Sir Mark Potter P