.png)
.png)
The Supreme Court was right to rule in Prudential that legal professional privilege should be restricted to the legal profession.
KEY POINTS
- Legal professional privilege is a right of clients not of lawyers.
- The arguments in the Prudential case.
- The courts have previously refused to extend LPP to other professions.
- Some limited extensions of the LPP principle have been made.
- Parliament will need to make any change to LPP.
The Law Society’s position has always been that the boundaries of legal professional privilege (LPP) a fundamental human right must remain clear and certain. We intervened in the case of R (on the application of Prudential plc and another) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax [2013] UKSC 1 to argue this and the judgment of the Supreme Court ensures this. LPP is not “owned” by the legal professional. It is a right of the client which legal professionals...
Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this item in full.
Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or 'customer.services@lexisnexis.co.uk' for further assistance.
