header-logo header-logo

Stemming family leaks

06 May 2016 / David Burrows
Issue: 7697 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail
nlj_7697_burrows

David Burrows shares his reflections on legal advice privilege & the Panama Papers

The leaked Panama Papers raise questions for a lawyer asked to advise in relation to documents which may provide evidence of fraud, for example a family lawyer who is asked for advice on the documents of an allegedly non-disclosing spouse. If fraud is proved, information from the leaks could be used to set aside a matrimonial finance order (per Sharland v Sharland [2015] UKSC 60, [2016] 1 All ER 671) if it shows non-disclosure. However, prior questions arise before documents can be used as part of the client’s case. The first is: are any of the leaked documents covered by legal professional privilege (LPP)—in this case, its major branch, legal advice privilege (LAP)—which would make them beyond the range of disclosure in court proceedings?

This article first defines LAP. Second, it asks whether LAP applies to leaked documents according to whether they were part of a “relevant legal context”; and, third, it questions whether LAP may not arise in the first place,

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 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
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll