Update 24 02 2021 for the subsequent findings on the facts, applying Russian law, see Tatneft PJSC v Bogolyubov & Ors  EWHC 411 (Comm) and my summary of issues here.
PJSC Tatneft v Bogolyubov & Ors  EWHC 2437 (Comm) is another example of a case where privilege is firmly considered to be subject to lex fori, like in the New York courts but unlike the approach of the Dutch courts. Moulder J did discuss the extent to which the rule applies to foreign unregistered, in-house lawyers. However she does this purely from the English point of view and without any consideration of either Rome I or Rome II. That is not very satisfactory in my view. As I have signalled before, one can discuss whether privilege is covered by the evidence and procedure exception in the Rome Regulations, however it must be discussed and cannot be just brushed under the carpet.
(Handbook of) European Private International Law, 2nd ed. 2016, Chapter 3, Chapter 4.
(3rd ed forthcoming February 2021).
One Reply to “PJSC Tatneft v Bogolyubov. Privilege under English law as lex fori.”