whether the internal investigation conducted in conjunction with counsel is in anticipation of proceedings and whether
the dominant purpose of the investigation is to prepare for said proceedings (if this is indeed the case).
RBS argued that litigation privilege applied:
the dominant purpose of the investigation and the documents was for RBS to defend itself against HMRC whose letter was effectively a pre-action letter before claim.
Not exact matches
Where a workplace accident has occurred, and the employer has statutory duties under sections 18 and 19
of the OHSA and simultaneously undertakes an internal
investigation, claiming legal privilege over all materials derived as part
of that
investigation, an inquiry is properly directed to a referee under Rule 6.45 to determine the
dominant purpose for the creation
of each document or bundle
of like documents in order to assess the claims
of legal privilege.
[53] The chambers judge erred in finding that the
dominant purpose of the internal
investigation was in contemplation
of litigation and therefore every document «created and / or collected» during the
investigation is clothed with legal privilege.
But even if this aspect
of the judgment is successfully appealed, the more intractable challenge facing companies will be to show that documents created during an internal
investigation — such as interview records — were created for the «
dominant purpose»
of future litigation.
Similarly, a plain reading
of Bill 132 suggests an organization's right to claim litigation privilege over documents created pursuant to the
investigation will be diminished, because an
investigation is arguably conducted for the
dominant purpose of compliance with Bill 132 and an organization's internal policies, rather than for the
dominant purpose of litigation.
The Court
of Appeal has considered more recently the ambit
of litigation privilege in one
of the many cases relating to the SFO's
investigation into the Tchenguiz brothers, stressing the importance
of the «
dominant purpose» test.58 (See also Chapter 31 on privilege.)
It appears that this will turn on the specific nature
of the
investigation and whether it can properly be said that adversarial proceedings are in contemplation, and that the
investigation is being conducted for the
dominant purpose of those contemplated proceedings (see Section 31.4.3).
Litigation privilege will only apply if litigation is reasonably contemplated when the
investigation begins, and any communication or document is created for the
dominant purpose of that litigation.