Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Ltd v Dechert LLP
2014
CHANCERY DIVISION
United Kingdom
CORAM
- THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ROTH
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
2014
CHANCERY DIVISION
United Kingdom
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Ltd (ENRC) applied under Section 70 of the Solicitors Act 1974 for a tax review of fees charged by their former solicitors, Dechert LLP, and sought a private hearing to maintain confidentiality. The court held that the implied waiver of Legal Professional Privilege (LPP) was limited to the specific context of resisting the application and ordered the hearing to be private to protect privileged information and prevent prejudice to ENRC in a Serious Fraud Office inquiry.
Judgment
MR JUSTICE ROTH:
Introduction
Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Ltd (“ENRC”) has applied pursuant to section 70 of the Solicitors Act 1974 (“SA 1974”) for an order for the taxation of the bills delivered by its former solicitors, Dechert LLP (“Dechert”). Should that application before the costs judge (along with the detailed assessment of the bills if the application is granted) be heard in private? On 24 April 2014, in a short unreserved judgment, Master Haworth declined ENRC’s request that the application be heard in private but gave permission to appeal.
The issue is clearly of importance for both parties. That is evident from the fact that for the hearing of this appeal, which took one day of court time, ENRC was represented by Lord Pannick QC, leading Richard Lissack QC, Benjamin Williams and Tamara Oppenheimer, whereas Dechert was represented by Charles Hollander QC, leading Simon Browne QC and Tony Singla.
The factual background
In December 2010, ENRC received a report from a whistleblower indicating that there may have been fraud involving some of its overseas operations. ENRC was at that time listed on the London Stock Exchange and it instructed outside lawyers to conduct an investigation. Initially, DLA Piper UK LLP was instructed but in April 2011 the partner there with conduct of the matter moved to Dechert and ENRC instructed Dechert to take over the investigation.
Following a leak of the whistleblower report and resulting articles in the press, the Serious Fraud Office (“SFO”) contacted ENRC and reminded it of the so-called self-reporting process which they operate in such circumstances. ENRC and Dechert, together with ENRC’s general corporate law advisors, Jones Day, held meetings with the SFO in late 2011, and ENRC thereafter agreed to a considerable expansion of the scope of Dechert’s investigation as part of a possible self-reporting process. ENRC entered into a formal written retainer with Dechert in April 2011.
The scale and range of the expanded investigation is apparent from the level of Dechert’s fees. In total, Dechert has billed ENRC over £16.3 million, of which some £11.7 million was invoiced in the period from 23 July 2012 to 11 April 2013. ENRC became increasingly concerned about the level of Dechert’s fees and what it perceived to be serious over-charging. On 27 March 2013, ENRC terminated Dechert’s retainer and instructed other lawyers. It is unnecessary to decide to what extent the decision to terminate