Sad, sad situation for Eversheds

Sir Elton John and his solicitors, Eversheds, last week failed in their attempt to force two journalists to reveal how a barrister's draft advice concerning a potential conflict of interest for the firm came into their possession.The opinion, from Bar Council chairman Jonathan Hirst QC and his junior Neil Calver of Brick Court Chambers, was accidentally thrown away with rubbish and later found its way into the journalists' hands.The Court of Appeal overturned a first-instance decision that Express editor Rosie Boycott and journalist Rachel Baird should say who gave them the document.The opinion concerned the question of whether it was appropriate for Eversheds to act in a claim by Sir Elton and his companies against accountants PricewaterhouseCoopers.The Master of the Rolls, Lord Woolf, said Mr Justice Morland should have refused disclosure; but, although accepting that the issue was one of public interest, he had decided that 'the fact that it is confidential to the claimants' meant there should be disclosure.Under s.10 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, a compelling case is needed for an order to disclose sources.

Lord Woolf said: 'The disclosure was not established to be necessary in the interests of justice and, even if it had been, the judge should have exercised his discretion to refuse disclosure.'In our view, it is important that when orders are made requiring journalists to depart from their normal professional standards, the merits of their doing so in the public interest are clearly demonstrated.

If the judge's order were to be allowed to stand, there would be a real danger that this would not be the position here.'The Court refused leave to appeal to the House of Lords and made a costs order in favour of the newspaper and the journalists.

City firm Richards Butler advised The Express and its legal adviser, Justin Walford.

Eversheds refused to comment.Neil Rose