Ding and Ding (No. 3)

In the matter of *Ding and Ding (No. 3)*, Cronin J of the Family Court of Australia considered a dispute concerning the admissibility of a document into evidence. The wife sought to rely on a document that had come into the husband's possession, to which the husband claimed legal professional privilege.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the husband had lost legal professional privilege over the document by virtue of it coming into the wife's possession. The Court was required to determine if the circumstances of the document's transfer or discovery had waived the privilege.

Cronin J ruled that the document remained protected by legal professional privilege. The Court's reasoning, though not detailed in the provided text, led to the conclusion that the privilege had not been lost. Consequently, the Court ordered that the document sought to be adduced into evidence is protected by legal professional privilege.