Is litigation privilege applicable to documents prepared as a result of an investigation into the accident and the claim?

With respect, I am of the view that this statement is in error for two reasons. Firstly, in stating the question, the Master assumed that there is a distinction between investigating the accident and the claim on one hand, and assisting in contemplated litigation on the other. In my view, the assumption that investigation of the accident and claim cannot be for the purpose of assisting in contemplated litigation is inaccurate. Anticipating litigation, or retaining counsel to act in that litigation may give rise to investigation of the accident and the claim which is for the dominant or exclusive purpose of preparing for trial. Documents prepared as a result of that investigation would also be for the dominant or exclusive purpose of preparing for trial, and subject to litigation privilege. Secondly, the Master's reasons may be read as stating that, if documents have a dual purpose, that may prevent them from having the dominant purpose of assisting in anticipated litigation. If that is what the Master intended to say, I respectfully disagree. If an investigation and the reports about it have a dual purpose, one of which is to assist in anticipated litigation, the duality of purpose does not mean that litigation privilege cannot exist. A document may be prepared for a multitude of purposes and, if the dominant purpose is to assist in anticipated litigation, then litigation privilege applies to the document: Waugh v. British Railways Board [1979] 2 AII E.R. 1169 (H.L.) at pp. 1173-74.