“The Financial Services Authority has been urged to review its operating procedures after it was found to have acted unlawfully in its use of legally privileged material during an enforcement investigation.”
Law Society’s Gazette, 20th October 2011
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
“In Flood v the Times, the supreme court has to consider questions of balance and the limits of editorial discretion.”
The Guardian, 17th October 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“This interesting decision of the First-Tier Tribunal (not linked to this post, for reasons I shall explain below) goes to the circumstances in which a public authority can refuse under environmental information rules to disclose legal advice received by it.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 25th August 2011
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“Legal professional privilege meant Harbottle & Lewis had to secure a waiver to discuss Murdoch’s claim about phone hacking claims.”
The Guardian, 22nd July 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Gray v News Group Newspapers Ltd and another; Coogan v Same [2011] EWHC 349 (Ch); [2011] WLR (D) 65
“The words ‘technical or commercial information’ in the definition of ‘intellectual property’ in section 72(5) of the Senior Courts Act 1981, section 72 (1) of which provided for the withdrawal of privilege against self or spousal incrimination in proceedings for, inter alia, infringement of rights pertaining to any intellectual property, meant technical or commercial information which could be protected by action.”
WLR Daily, 28th February 2011
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
“There was no difference in principle between the ambit of a solicitor’s duty to the court in relation to the conduct and supervision of disclosure of documents and the conduct and supervision of any redaction of disclosable doccuments prior to inspection.”
WLR Daily, 24th February 2011
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Clift v Slough Borough Council [2010] EWCA Civ 1171; [2010] WLR (D) 343
“Where a public authority had widely disclosed information about a person who had been in contact with its staff, both stating that she had been placed on its violent persons register and enclosing the entry itself, it was relevant, when looking to the applicability of qualified privilege, to have regard to the art 8 Convention rights of the person so identified and also to look to the proportionality of the disclosure itself.”
WLR Daily, 22nd December 2010
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Oceanbulk Shipping and Trading SA v TMT Asia Ltd and others [2010] UKSC 44; [2010] WLR(D) 270
“Facts communicated between parties in the course of ‘without prejudice’ negotiations which, but for the ‘without prejudice’ rule, would be admissible as part of the factual matrix or surrounding circumstances as an aid to construction of the resulting agreement, were admissible in evidence, as an exception to the rule, in a subsequent dispute between the parties as to the proper meaning of a clause in the agreement.”
WLR Daily, 29th October 2010
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
“Three solicitors were today suing police for wrongful imprisonment after falling foul of strict prison regulations.”
The Independent, 19th October 2010
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“The right to keep correspondence and documents relating to legal advice secret does not exist when the person giving the advice is an accountant, the Court of Appeal has ruled.”
OUT-LAW.com, 18th October 2010
Source: www.out-law.com
“Legal advice privilege applied only to advice given by a member of the legal profession.”
WLR Daily, 13th October 2010
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
“The Court of Appeal today unanimously confirmed that legal professional privilege (LPP) only applies to qualified lawyers – solicitors and barristers. The decision was welcomed by the Law Society as giving certainty to solicitors and their clients.”
Law Society’s Gazette, 14th October 2010
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
“A post-mortem examination report into the death of a man at the G20 protests last year has been withheld from authorities, it has emerged.”
BBC News, 8th September 2010
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Regina v Seaton [2010] EWCA Crim 1980; [2010] WLR (D) 234
“Where it was suggested at trial that a defendant’s or witness’s account was a recent fabrication, he could not, unless he had waived legal professional privilege, be asked whether he had told his lawyer what he now said was the truth, or whether he was willing to waive the privilege. If a defendant gave evidence of what had passed between him and his lawyer, he could not be in breach of his own privilege, but was waiving privilege, although not necessarily waiving it entirely and generally. If a defendant said that he had given his solicitor the account then offered at trial, that would ordinarily mean that he could not be cross-examined about exactly what he had told the solicitor on that topic, but another party could comment upon the fact that the solicitor had not been called to confirm something which, if true, he easily could confirm, if the comment were fair.”
WLR Daily, 20th August 2010
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
“The Law Society has been granted permission to intervene in a Court of Appeal case that could see legal professional privilege (LPP) extended to non-lawyers.”
Law Society’s Gazette, 6th May 2010
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
Oceanbulk Shipping and Trading SA v TMT Asia Ltd and others [2010] EWCA Civ 79; [2010] WLR (D) 40
“There was not, and need not be, an exception to the ‘without prejudice’ rule such as to permit evidence of ‘without prejudice’ communications and discussions to be given if there was a dispute about the interpretation of a written settlement agreement.”
WLR Daily, 16th February 2010
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Regina v K (Matrimonial proceedings: Privilege against self-incrimination)
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
“While information disclosed under compulsion in matrimonial ancillary relief proceedings was not admissible in criminal proceedings, admissions made in withoutprejudice negotiations were not inadmissible.”
The Times, 19th August 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025