header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
01 December 2017 / Mark Hall , Jan-Jaap Baer
Issue: 7772 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Legal advice privilege: a search for clarity?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7772_baer

Jan-Jaap Baer & Mark Hall review recent developments in the law of privilege

  • The current restrictive approach to privilege poses real challenges to lawyers when seeking to investigate issues raised by corporate clients without creating documents that will be subsequently disclosable to regulators or litigants.
  • Increasing difficulties in claiming privilege may make it harder to persuade employees to fully co-operate in investigations.

Since 2004 the leading authority on legal advice privilege has been the much criticised Court of Appeal decision in Three Rivers (No 5) [2003] EWCA Civ 474, [2003] QB 1556, which gave a restrictive interpretation as to who is the ‘client’ in the corporate context. Several recent court decisions have confirmed this narrow approach and may suggest a trend towards yet further erosion in the ability to claim both legal advice and litigation privilege.

Who is the client?

Legal advice privilege applies to confidential communications passing between a client and the client’s lawyer which have come into existence for the purpose of giving or receiving legal

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll