‘A council has won an appeal to the First-Tier Tribunal over its refusal to meet a freedom of information request for the disclosure of legal advice given to a consultant conducting an investigation on the authority’s behalf.’
Local Government Lawyer, 3rd June 2014
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘National laws on protecting privileged legal communications are outdated and need to be brought into the digital age, according to the body representing Europe’s lawyers.’
Legal Futures, 2nd June 2014
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘FOIA provides an exemption (s. 42) expressly for legal professional privilege; as is well known, there is ‘strong inherent weight’ in maintaining that exemption. What about the EIRs? LPP is not expressly mentioned, but regulation 12(5)(b) EIR applies to information the disclosure of which would adversely affect “the course of justice, the ability of a person to receive a fair trial or the ability of a public authority to conduct an inquiry of a criminal or disciplinary nature”. Does information attracting LPP automatically come within that exception? Many practitioners operate on the assumption that the answer is ‘yes’. The Upper Tribunal has on a previous occasion, however, left that question open: DCLG v IC and Robinson [2012] UKUT 103 (AAC); [2012] 2 Info LR 43.’
Panopticon, 6th May 2014
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
‘Highly confidential documents that were subject to legal professional privilege (LPP) did not lose this status when they were emailed by a party to his girlfriend, who then forwarded them to and accessed them through her work email account, the High Court has ruled.’
OUT-LAW.com, 28th April 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
Makudi v Baron Triesman of Tottenham [2014] EWCA Civ 179; [2014] WLR (D) 98
‘Where a claim in defamation was brought against the defendant for repeating at an extra-parliamentary inquiry his evidence before a parliamentary committee, he was immune from the claim, by virtue of article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689, because of the public interest in the evidence and the close nexus between the evidence on the two occasions.’
WLR Daily, 26th February 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The fair and accurate reporting of court proceedings has long been protected from libel action by the defence of privilege. Contemporaneous fair and accurate reports of court proceedings in public are now protected by absolute privilege and other fair and accurate reports by qualified privilege. In the former case no libel action can be brought, in the latter an action will only succeed if malice is proved.’
Legal Week, 27th February 2014
Source: www.legalweek.com
‘A brewing company was unable to prevent correspondence between itself and its bank and accountants from being disclosed during a dispute connected with the sale of its eastern European business, a High Court judge has ruled.
OUT-LAW.com, 23rd January 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
‘A local authority has won an appeal in the First-Tier Tribunal over an Information Commissioner decision that it should disclose legal advice related to the redevelopment of a town centre.’
Local Government Lawyer, 15th January 2014
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
“GCHQ is probably intercepting legally privileged communications between lawyers and their clients, according to a detailed claim filed on behalf of eight Libyans involved in politically sensitive compensation battles with the UK.”
The Guardian, 13th October 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“OPINION: It will be harder than ever for companies to keep certain kinds of documents from being opened up to scrutiny after a recent High Court decision. The ruling does, however, give helpful guidance on what organisations have to do to secure and maintain litigation privilege.”
OUT-LAW.com, 16th September 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
“Businesses that wish to report their involvement in cartel operations in order to benefit from the leniency of the UK’s competition regulator will not be obliged to waive their rights to legal professional privilege (LPP).”
OUT-LAW.com, 9th July 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
“In R (on the application of Prudential Plc and another) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax and another [2013] UKSC 1 a majority of the Supreme Court held that legal advice privilege does not extend to protect legal advice given by professionals who are not lawyers and that it is for Parliament, not the courts, to decide whether and how the privilege should be extended.”
Hardwicke Chambers, 19th February 2013
“FOCUS: The decision by the Supreme Court last month that legal professional privilege would not apply to advice from non-lawyers confirms how important it is for insurers to maximise the value of legal privilege.”
OUT-LAW.com, 13th February 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
“As Ryder J contemplates reform of the family justice system, he may wish to be aware of the assault by the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court upon some of the more cherished assumptions of family lawyers. Family lawyers should perhaps look to the legitimacy of some of their long-held shibboleths before another Court of Appeal assault. To ignore the law, as the cases below show, can be repressive and is certainly illegal.”
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 31st January 2013
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
“The fight to defend legal professional privilege looks set to continue, despite last week’s landmark victory for the profession in the Supreme Court. Parliament was urged to consider extending the scope of LPP in the wake of the judgment by the 140,000-member Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales.”
Law Society’s Gazette, 28th January 2013
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
“Legal advice privilege would not be extended to communications in connection with advice given by professional people other than members of the legal profession, even where that advice was legal advice which the professional person was qualified to give.”
WLR Daily, 23rd January 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The Supreme Court has ruled that legal advice privilege should only apply to advice given by a member of the legal profession; that this is what the common law has always meant, and that any wider interpretation would lead to uncertainty. Two strong dissents do not find any principled underpinning for the restriction of the privilege to advice from solicitors or barristers.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 24th January 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025