Hastie Group Ltd (In liq) v Moore

In the matter of Hastie Group Ltd (In liq) v Moore, the dispute arose from a winding up petition concerning the insolvent company. The liquidators sought to enforce a notice to produce documents, which Moore resisted on the grounds of client legal privilege. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The central legal issue was whether the documents in question were privileged under section 119 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) and if any privilege attached to documents related to searches for litigation funding. Additionally, the court had to determine whether the privilege had been waived under section 122 of the Evidence Act.

The court examined the nature and purpose of the documents, focusing on whether they were prepared for the dominant purpose of giving legal advice. It was noted that documents prepared for the purpose of facilitating litigation funding might not necessarily be privileged. The court held that some documents were privileged, as they were prepared for the purpose of obtaining legal advice, but others were not, particularly those related to the funding searches. The court also considered whether the privilege had been waived through any action or inaction by the party claiming privilege. Ultimately, the court found that the privilege had not been waived.

The court ruled that certain documents were subject to legal professional privilege and thus could not be compelled under the notice to produce. However, documents relating to litigation funding searches were not privileged. The court ordered that the privileged documents were not to be disclosed, while the others were to be produced as required by the notice. This decision highlights the nuanced approach the court takes when assessing privilege claims, particularly in the context of litigation funding.