{"title":"共同利益原则与重大交易谈判中的披露","authors":"Anne King","doi":"10.2307/20141866","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"During negotiations for corporate transactions, each party involved shares non-public information with the other party. Information shared during negotiations is instrumental in assessing the financial and legal risks of doing business. Sometimes, one of the parties discloses communications protected by the attorney-client privilegesuch as a patent opinion letter or a memorandum assessing a corporate client's litigation risks. Disclosure of a privileged document during business negotiations appears to work an implied waiver of the attorney-client privilege, meaning that the shared documents could be compelled in future litigation. Document sharing does not inexorably work a waiver: the law of evidence recognizes that parties with a common interest may share privileged communications without waiving the privilege.' Nevertheless, the \"common interest doctrine\" arguably does not protect disclosures during business negotiations. In order to come within the common interest doctrine, parties must share a common interest that is \"legal, not solely commercial,\"2 and parties must anticipate collaboration in pending or future litigation.3 Under this definition, one might argue, corporations engaged in negotiations do not share a common interest because each party seeks to maximize its commercial gain","PeriodicalId":51436,"journal":{"name":"University of Chicago Law Review","volume":"26 1","pages":"8"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2007-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Common Interest Doctrine and Disclosures during Negotiations for Substantial Transactions\",\"authors\":\"Anne King\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/20141866\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"During negotiations for corporate transactions, each party involved shares non-public information with the other party. Information shared during negotiations is instrumental in assessing the financial and legal risks of doing business. Sometimes, one of the parties discloses communications protected by the attorney-client privilegesuch as a patent opinion letter or a memorandum assessing a corporate client's litigation risks. Disclosure of a privileged document during business negotiations appears to work an implied waiver of the attorney-client privilege, meaning that the shared documents could be compelled in future litigation. Document sharing does not inexorably work a waiver: the law of evidence recognizes that parties with a common interest may share privileged communications without waiving the privilege.' Nevertheless, the \\\"common interest doctrine\\\" arguably does not protect disclosures during business negotiations. In order to come within the common interest doctrine, parties must share a common interest that is \\\"legal, not solely commercial,\\\"2 and parties must anticipate collaboration in pending or future litigation.3 Under this definition, one might argue, corporations engaged in negotiations do not share a common interest because each party seeks to maximize its commercial gain\",\"PeriodicalId\":51436,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"University of Chicago Law Review\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2007-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"University of Chicago Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/20141866\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Chicago Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/20141866","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Common Interest Doctrine and Disclosures during Negotiations for Substantial Transactions
During negotiations for corporate transactions, each party involved shares non-public information with the other party. Information shared during negotiations is instrumental in assessing the financial and legal risks of doing business. Sometimes, one of the parties discloses communications protected by the attorney-client privilegesuch as a patent opinion letter or a memorandum assessing a corporate client's litigation risks. Disclosure of a privileged document during business negotiations appears to work an implied waiver of the attorney-client privilege, meaning that the shared documents could be compelled in future litigation. Document sharing does not inexorably work a waiver: the law of evidence recognizes that parties with a common interest may share privileged communications without waiving the privilege.' Nevertheless, the "common interest doctrine" arguably does not protect disclosures during business negotiations. In order to come within the common interest doctrine, parties must share a common interest that is "legal, not solely commercial,"2 and parties must anticipate collaboration in pending or future litigation.3 Under this definition, one might argue, corporations engaged in negotiations do not share a common interest because each party seeks to maximize its commercial gain
期刊介绍:
The University of Chicago Law Review is a quarterly journal of legal scholarship. Often cited in Supreme Court and other court opinions, as well as in other scholarly works, it is among the most influential journals in the field. Students have full responsibility for editing and publishing the Law Review; they also contribute original scholarship of their own. The Law Review"s editorial board selects all pieces for publication and, with the assistance of staff members, performs substantive and technical edits on each of these pieces prior to publication.