The party arguing the privilege carries the weight of the evidence that the privilege exists. 1) The documents were submitted before an agreement was reached between Hamilton Capital and the applicant and (2) the communications were exchanged before a dispute was brought. Id. at 9. The critical feature that was missing from the applicant`s argument was that they could not prove that the complainants and Hamilton Capital were allies in a common legal matter at the time of the communication. At Acceleration Bay, the applicant submitted that the funding of the procedure provides funds to ensure, develop or provide legal representation. It`s the acceleration bay at 8. The applicant also argued that a community of legal interest could exist between a patent holder and a process proponent under the product of work privilege. See id. (referring to Carlyle Inv. Mgmt.
L.L.C. v. Moonmouth Co. S.A., 2015 WL 778846, at 7 (Del. Chv. 24, 2015)). But as the Carlyle case focused exclusively on the issue of the work product, the court found that the Carlyle case for solicitor-client privilege was not granted on this issue.- Acceleration Bay at 8. Transactions, litigation and business litigation often involve several clients with closed interests, but with different lawyers. Clients and their advisors often want to communicate with other clients and consultants without risking renouncing existing privileges or immunities. Clients and legal advisers can benefit from the options developed by the courts, including through the common defence or the common interest. The legal facts were that the interests of tenants and brokers were similar, but not identical, and that the common interest was largely commercial and not legal.
The court concluded that it was not a sufficient “common interest” to simply share the desire to succeed in litigation. Other jurisdictions have interpreted a common interest more, but courts still find that the interests of the joint parties are not sufficiently “common” or “common” to recognize a common defence agreement. The best practice is to articulate common legal interests, including positions, defences and potential liabilities.