Prejudice is a legal term with different meanings, which depend on whether it is used in criminal, civil, or common law.
In legal context, prejudice differs from the more common use of the word and so the term has specific technical meanings.
For example, dismissal with prejudice forbids a party to refile the case and might occur because the court finds the alleged facts can't state a valid claim, or due of misconduct on the part of the party that filed the claim or criminal complaint, or as the result of an out-of-court agreement or settlement.
If the case ends with prejudice, the effect on the defendant (for the purpose of punishment) is the equivalent of a finding of not guilty, and they cannot be retried.
The present action is dismissed, but the possibility remains open that the plaintiff may file another suit on the same claim.
If it is an involuntary dismissal, the judge has determined that the plaintiff has brought the case in bad faith, has failed to bring the case in a reasonable time, has failed to comply with court procedures, or on the merits after hearing the arguments in court.
If it is a "voluntary dismissal with prejudice", it is the result of an out-of-court agreement or settlement between parties that they agree is final.
A prohibition exists on documents marked "without prejudice" being used as a façade to conceal facts or evidence from the court.
As a result, documents marked "without prejudice" that do not actually contain any offer of settlement may be used as evidence, should the matter proceed to court.
[9][6] The House of Lords' 2009 ruling in the case of Ofulue v Bossert UKHL 16 confirmed that the public policy intention behind the without prejudice rule, which serves to encourage the parties in dispute to speak freely in order to settle the issues between them, should enjoy "wide protection", and therefore only in exceptional cases could statements issued "without prejudice" be used in evidence.
333, 1976),[12] and exists because English courts have held that "without prejudice" includes for the purposes of costs, as in Court of Appeal, in Walker v. Wilshire (23 QBD 335, 1889): Letters or conversations written or declared to be "without prejudice" cannot be taken into consideration in determining whether there is a good cause for depriving a successful litigant of costs.UK freedom of information law renders certain information exempt from disclosure obligations where its publication "would, or would be likely to", prejudice any of the interests protected by statutory provision.
[15] An action (such as an error made by the court) is prejudicial if it substantially affects a litigant's legal rights.