![HT-2022-000132 - [2025] EWHC 1058 (TCC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_yJUntHA.png){kind=logo}
Documents where there is an identifiable Lawyer recipient/ Commentator but not obvious that the content is legal advice
Documents where there is an identifiable Lawyer recipient/ Commentator but not obvious that the content is legal advice
Mr Hossain submitted that this categorisation was relevant to lines 12, 14 and 15. I have already addressed lines 12 and 15.
- Heading
- Background
- Disclosure
- The parties’ disclosure exercises
- Legal principles: privilege
- Inadvertent disclosure of privileged material
- Specific issues relevant to the review in this case
- The subjective review
- The relevance of Quinn Emanuel’s review
- The 20 groups of Use Pursued Documents
- Documents which did not appear obviously privileged
- Line 15
- Line 16
- Line 20
- Line 22
- Lines 24, 25 and 26
- Line 12
- Documents where there is an identifiable Lawyer recipient/ Commentator but not obvious that the content is legal advice
- Line 14
- Redacted documents which had already been reviewed for privilege, and no obvious reason to question it
- Line 19
- Documents where redaction was inconsistent
- Documents in which the content is potentially legal advice or reflects the substance of legal advice, but it was considered these were deliberately disclosed as answering to D35
- Conclusions