header-logo header-logo

Is client confidentiality at risk again?

18 September 2019 / Georgina Squire
Issue: 7856 / Categories: Opinion , Procedure & practice , Legal services
printer mail-detail
Lawyers will be keenly watching the latest development in an important dispute over legal professional privilege, says Georgina Squire

Legal professional privilege (LPP) is a key component of the ability of lawyers to advise their clients. It is a fundamental right that enables clients to give full and frank disclosure of confidential information to their lawyers, so that they can receive legal advice secure in the knowledge it will not become disclosable and therefore open to scrutiny at the hands of third parties.

SFO v ENRC

LPP is a principle that, although entrenched in our legal system, has long been a topic of considerable debate. The most important decision on the principle of LPP in recent times came from the Court of Appeal last September, in Director of the Serious Fraud Office v Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Ltd (Law Society Intervening) [2018] EWCA Civ 2006, [2018] All ER (D) 05 (Sep). This landmark appeal was a defining moment in our understanding of the scope of the LPP principle

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll