Thank you for your answer, which is what I thought.
However, I meant to add one further qualification:
- and when the same lawyer and law firm now acting for Defendant B and the Development Company (as co defendant) in Case 2, has previously acted for the Development Company when Plaintiff X and Defendant B were both directors and gave instructions to the same law firm.
Sorry, I won't drag this out much longer. Just want to be clear...
What if X was not yet a director of the Development Company, and had signed the Law Firms terms as an individual and was giving instructions to the Law Firm in respect of the Development Company because he had an ongoing and future interest in the success of the Development Company
The prejudice is that Defendant A and Defendant B are now working together and sharing evidence with the same Lawyer and Law Firm in order to stuff Plaintiff X. Also, as evidence is disclosed in Case 1, it has included evidence in relation to Case 2 which Plaintiff X did not need or wish to disclose at that time. The arrangements are creating an unfair advantage.
To conclude the question, what is your thoughts on this prejudice?