Legal advice privilege meaning

Checklist This checklist sets out principal matters to address when launching an internal inquiry into suspected criminal conduct. For fuller guidance, see Practice Note: How to plan and conduct an internal investigation. What is the purpose of the investigation? Prioritise fact-finding over determining liability. What is the scope of the investigation? Create clear terms of reference. Decide who should undertake the investigation and assign roles within the investigation. If Board members will be involved, verify whether a board resolution is required to authorise this. Take legal advice on likely Legal Professional Privilege (LPP) issues. Ensure the Board, or a duly constituted sub-committee, oversees the investigation and is identified as ‘the client’ in any engagement letter and/or correspondence with internal and/or external lawyers; keep written records of these decisions. If deploying internal audit, consider whether it was involved in the predicate events...

This checklist reviews the employment law considerations that arise when carrying out a business reorganisation. It addresses initial planning points, whether a redundancy situation exists, ‘some other substantial reason’ (SOSR), how the employer may resist claims about dismissals, whether collective consultation duties are engaged, changes to contractual terms and conditions, and if a TUPE transfer applies. It proceeds on the basis that there is a restructure but the undertaking continues to operate at the same site and, therefore, no ‘place of work’ redundancy arises. For broader guidance, see Business reorganisations—overview and Practice Note: Implementing a business reorganisation—employment issues. Initial considerations Assess the composition of the project team and safeguard project documentation to: preserve confidentiality and for consultation purposes (eg label all proposals as ‘subject to consultation’). See Practice Note: Implementing a business reorganisation—employment issues: Initial considerations limit circulation, where required, to protect legal advice privilege Consider whether non-disclosure agreements are required and, if so,...

In the aftermath of an incident occurring on a construction site, consider the following: Appoint an incident team If a notional incident management team has already been named within the business’s incident planning regime, activate that team without delay. If no such team exists, establish an incident management team immediately. Consider RIDDOR reporting requirements Ensure the necessary notifications are made in line with RIDDOR (Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 2013, SI 2013/1417). Refer to Practice Note: Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences at Work Regulations 2013, SI 2013/1471 (RIDDOR)—general requirements. Allocate responsibilities Distribute duties amongst the team so each member has a clearly defined remit and required actions can be completed swiftly and effectively. Give close attention to communication between team members to prevent duplication of effort or tasks being missed entirely...

Abbot v The Information Commissioner [2024] UKFTT 478 (GRC) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling mirrors the approach in other recent decisions on the operation of the exception to disclosure under EIR 2004, SI 2004/3391, reg 12(5)(b), again stressing the considerable weight that legal professional privilege carries within our justice system. It therefore highlights the obstacles applicants will encounter when attempting to access documents protected by legal professional privilege, and that only ‘special or unusual’ circumstances are likely to be sufficient for the public interest in disclosure to prevail over the interest in preserving legal professional privilege. That said, legal professional privilege was not the Tribunal’s only concern when concluding that EIR 2004, SI 2004/3391, reg 12(5)(b) applied. The Tribunal indicated that the exception would have been engaged even without legal professional privilege, particularly because releasing the material would not have added anything of substance to what is already in the public domain. As such, the analysis turned on whether disclosure would materially add...

In this issue: UK private actions UK subsidy control EU antitrust EU competition policy Daily and weekly news alerts Caselex CAT issues judgment on allocation of undistributed damages following settlement in alleged rail ticket overcharge damages claim The CAT has delivered its ruling in Justin Gutmann v First MTR South Western Trains Limited and Another, addressing how to allocate undistributed damages left after a settlement. Brought by Mr Justin Gutmann as the Class Representative (CR) under section 47 of the Competition Act 1998, the claim alleged an abuse of dominance by Stagecoach South Western Trains Limited (SSWT) for not making ‘boundary fares’ sufficiently available to travelcard holders. Background In 2019, Mr Gutmann applied to commence opt-out collective proceedings under section 47B CA 1998 against First MTR and SSWT, which had operated the South Western rail franchise at different times. In October 2021, the CAT authorised him to act as CR in these proceedings and in parallel...

In this issue: Trusts Court of Protection UK taxation for Private Client Updates to HMRC Manuals Tax avoidance, evasion and non-compliance Regulatory compliance for Private Client Budgets and Finance Bills Family enterprises and ownership frameworks Disputed trusts and estates Pensions, insurance and tax-efficient investments Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland International Question of the week Additional Private Client updates this week Daily and weekly news alerts LexTalk®Private Client: a Lexis+® community New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q&As Useful information Trusts HMCTS issues guidance on applications to recover funds paid into the High Court, Chancery Division HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has issued guidance on making applications to recover money held by the High Court (Chancery Division). Released on 18 December 2025, the guidance covers three situations: surpluses from property repossessions when entitled parties cannot...

Privilege—the basic principles This Practice Note sets out several of the issues that general privilege principles create for IP practitioners, together with specific statutory IP privilege provisions to keep in view. For broader guidance on privilege as a whole, see: Privilege and without prejudice communications—overview. Privilege exists because a client and a lawyer need to communicate frankly about protecting the client’s interests, without those conversations being disclosable to an opposing party or to the court. Although the following are not the only species of privilege, the two principal forms to focus on in the IP sphere are ‘legal advice privilege’ and ‘litigation privilege’. The rules governing each, as developed through case law, can operate with very different practical effects, and their consequences may diverge considerably. These two forms are sometimes grouped together as ‘legal professional privilege’, yet that phrasing is confusingly close to ‘legal advice privilege’ and will therefore not be used again in this note. Appreciating the differences between legal advice privilege and litigation privilege is of...

This Practice Note outlines legal professional privilege (LPP) in Scottish civil litigation. It should be read alongside Practice Note: Privilege in Scotland—general principles, which sets out the two main categories of legal professional privilege: legal advice privilege (LAP) and litigation privilege (LP), and also refers to without prejudice privilege, waiver of privilege and common interest privilege. For the position in England and Wales, see: Privilege and without prejudice communications—overview and Practice Note: Privilege—general principles which, in addition to providing an overview, link to more detailed guidance on aspects of LPP. Key: FOI—freedom of information LAP—legal advice privilege LP—litigation privilege LPP—legal professional privilege Accessing privileged material in Scottish civil litigation In Scotland, several mechanisms enable recovery of otherwise privileged documents or communications, either within proceedings or outwith the court process, including: section 1 of the Administration of Justice (Scotland) Act 1972 (AJ(S)A 1972) commission and diligence Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FI(S)A 2002) ...

This Practice Note was prepared by Anne Redston, Barrister. It reflects her personal view; she is not authorised to speak for the Tribunals Service or the judiciary. This Practice Note: explores how legal professional privilege (LPP) operates in relation to tax matters examines the relationship between LPP and HMRC’s powers to obtain information and conduct inspections considers the extent to which LPP is available to non-lawyer tax advisers This Practice Note is a brief overview and does not cover every circumstance, so you may need further advice concerning your client’s position. For example, it does not consider privilege: under Scots law, or in relation to criminal proceedings, such as tax fraud It also does not address without prejudice privilege. This is considered in Practice Note: Without prejudice communications and in Wired Orthodontics. What is LPP? In the ex parte Morgan Grenfell case, Lord Hoffman described LPP as ‘a fundamental human right...

Legal professional privilege (LPP) is a core legal protection that permits [ insert organisation’s name ] to resist producing evidence to a third party or the court. It enables the organisation to seek expert legal guidance, setting out all pertinent facts to our legal advisers without concern that they will later be revealed and used against us. This short guide sets out what legal professional privilege (LPP) is and how we can best preserve it. 1 What is legal professional privilege? LPP is an umbrella term covering: legal advice privilege (LAP) litigation privilege LPP safeguards the confidentiality of written and verbal communications between lawyers and clients. It is a fundamental entitlement, allowing a party to withhold material from disclosure to any third party or a court. Legal advice privilege Legal advice privilege applies to all confidential communications between a client and their lawyer made for the purpose of giving or obtaining legal advice...

Precedent sample privilege log Click to access the Precedent sample privilege log. Please note this register was created in Excel, so it cannot be exported to Word. This Precedent sample privilege log is suitable when an organisation runs an internal investigation. It helps you catalogue documents covered by legal professional privilege, indicate whether they are redacted or fully withheld, and state the rationale. Use it to note whether access is limited by redaction or complete withholding, together with the underlying justification. It is equally applicable where an organisation faces an external investigation. Legal professional privilege (LPP) shields documents from disclosure to third parties, including government agencies, regulators and claimants in civil proceedings. There are two categories of LPP: legal advice privilege litigation privilege See Practice Note: Internal investigations and legal professional privilege—Types of legal professional privilege...

1 Consider seeking external advice Recognising fully how intricate many sanctions frameworks are; the risk that offences may span several jurisdictions, and nuanced issues arising in relation to privilege and in‑house counsel, it is often prudent to obtain specialist guidance from external solicitors promptly at the earliest opportunity once any breach is identified. 2 Cease dealing with the sanctioned entity/person/funds etc Stop all dealings with any sanctioned entity/person/funds etc immediately. Hold the transaction, but do not return funds to the sanctioned entity or person. Where funds have reached the UK from a designated person outside the EU, government policy mandates that those funds are frozen on entry to the UK...

Legal professional privilege Legal professional privilege denotes a doctrine shielding particular categories of documents from scrutiny or inspection by the opposing party to the case. Legal advice privilege covers materials containing advice irrespective of whether proceedings are envisaged at any stage. Litigation privilege concerns documents created when litigation is extant or on foot, anticipated, or pending as such. Both are treated as sitting beneath the umbrella of legal advice privilege. A hearing attendance note will, as a rule, come within litigation privilege and so need not be disclosed to the other side. The request for a copy of that hearing note may, therefore, be made with a respondent’s potential appeal in mind...

Legal professional privilege Legal professional privilege is a doctrine shielding specified categories of documents from scrutiny by the opposing party in proceedings. Legal advice privilege covers materials that convey advice, regardless of whether litigation is anticipated. Litigation privilege concerns documents created when litigation is on foot, foreseen, or awaiting commencement. Both are treated as sitting beneath the umbrella of legal advice privilege. A hearing attendance note will usually attract litigation privilege and, as a result, need not be disclosed to the other side. A request for a copy of the hearing attendance note may, in fact, be made with a respondent’s prospective appeal in mind...