header-logo header-logo

An unfair advantage?

Chris Bryden and Michael Salter warn against tampering with the “without prejudice” rule

It is a well-established doctrine that, subject to certain exceptions, written or oral communications made in a genuine attempt to compromise a dispute between the parties cannot be admitted in evidence. The “without prejudice” rule is a clear example of public policy, as the promotion of the settlement of disputes without recourse to litigation is a central aim in our legal system. It enshrines the principle that parties are able to negotiate openly without fear of being attacked by having their words quoted back at them in open court.

In the recent case of Brodie v Nicola Ward (t/a First Steps Nursery) [2008] All ER (D) 115 (Feb), UKEAT/0526/07, an employee attempted to overturn a ruling by the employment tribunal that a letter sent to her by solicitors acting for her employer was subject to the rule and therefore inadmissible. She argued that the letter amounted to a “last straw” that had caused her to resign and claim constructive dismissal. The employment tribunal found as a preliminary

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll