Today’s bounce ($0.02 on a random topic): my favourite player breaks his hand. Oh the humanity!
The bucket ($0.02 on a legal principle): privilege claims over part of a document. Is it possible?
Ah, Steph Curry. Innocently trying to score a bucket in today’s game. And what happens?
A huge Aussie, Aron Baynes, falls on his arm! ARROONNNN whaddya doing!!!
Aron possesses a physique suited to a front rower for Souths, and wood-chopping, but also knows his way around a basketball court.
These things happen I suppose. So, for the next while, I’ll have to get through, somehow.
Which leads me to the bucket – claiming privilege over only part of a document.
Is it all or nothing; or could just say 1 para of a without prejudice letter be excluded from evidence?
On Gladio v Buckworth [2015] NSWSC 922, the latter. At [363]-[366], McDougall J expressed the view that (for WPP) s 131(1)(a) could apply to only part of a letter, unless (for example) the rest of the letter was closely intertwined with the privileged material.
So, it’s not an all or nothing proposition. Important not only for evidence, but also likely discovery, NTPs, etc.
Alright, see ya. JD #bouncesandbuckets
Jonathon Dooley 