Re Konigsberg (A Brankrupt)

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Date1989
Year1989
CourtChancery Division

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
40 cases
  • BBGP Managing General Partner Ltd v Babcock & Brown Global Partners
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 20 August 2010
    ...Mood & R 182; Perry v Smith (1842) M&W 681; Shore v Bedford (1843) 5 Man & Gex 271; Ross v Gibbs (1869) LR 8 Eq 522 and Re Koenigsberg [1989] 3 All ER 289. (I note that there is no question here of a separate and exclusive retainer of Slaughter and May by some only of the joint clients). I ......
  • Gelatissimo Ventures (S) Pte Ltd v Singapore Flyer Pte Ltd
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 21 October 2009
    ...thread was owned jointly by the plaintiffs and could only be waived if all of them agreed to do so. (see Re Konigsberg (A Bankrupt)[1989] 1 WLR 1257; The Sagheera [1997] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 18 In this case, it was not clear whether Jawahar intended to waive the privilege in the email thread when......
  • Lavallee, Rackel and Heintz et al. v. Canada (Attorney General), (1998) 218 A.R. 229 (QB)
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen''s Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • 5 June 1998
    ...68; 43 N.R. 361; 30 C.R.(3d) 289, refd to. [para. 14]. Canada v. Ng (1989), 97 A.R. 241 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 14]. Konigsberg, Re, [1989] 3 All E.R. 289, refd to. [para. R. v. Leibel (R.J.), [1993] 7 W.W.R. 407; 111 Sask.R. 107 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 14]. R. v. Giguere (1978), 44 C.C.C.(......
  • Ranjeet Singh Sidhu v Zavarco Plc
    • Malaysia
    • High Court (Malaysia)
    • 1 January 2016
  • Get Started for Free
1 books & journal articles
  • ADMISSIBILITY, PRIVILEGE AND THE EXPUNGING OF EVIDENCE
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 1994, December 1994
    • 1 December 1994
    ...for a party to give evidence of a privileged matter if he holds the privilege jointly with his opponent: In re Kronigsberg (A Bankrupt)[1989] 1 WLR 1257. 38 More may be revealed as the law develops. 39 Principally his lawyer and, in certain cases, a third party: Supra, note 20. 40 This is s......