Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Resolution issues Brexit notes for family lawyers ahead of IP completion day
Family lawyer organisation, Resolution, has issued two joint notes to assist family lawyers in England and Wales ahead of the end of the Brexit transition/implementation period at 11 pm on 31 December...
Online filing is real-time on New Year's Eve: practice direction change to accommodate EU withdrawal arrangements
I have heard that there will be an amendment to the relevant practice directions to provide that online applications received on New Year’s Eve after 4:30 PM and before 11:00 PM will count as...
Northamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust v AB
The issue in this case concerned AB’s capacity to make specific decisions about treatment relating to her anorexia nervosa. She was 28 years old and had suffered with anorexia since the age of...
EU laws continue until at least 2038 and beyond
The UK left the EU on 31 January 2020.  But in matters of law it fully leaves on 31 December 2020.  But EU laws will continue to apply, and be applied, in the English family courts from 1...
Remote hearings in family proceedings – how is justice perceived?
The motion for the recent Kingsley Napley debate:  “This House believes remote hearings are not remotely fair” was carried with a fairly balanced 56% in favour and 44% against....
View all articles
Authors

Legal Professional Privilege and Three Rivers (No 6): Part 3 - Conclusions

Sep 29, 2018, 17:19 PM
This is the third and final article in a series about legal professional privilege (LPP) in the light of the decision of the House of Lords in Three Rivers District Council v Governor and Company of the Bank of England (No 6) [2004] UKHL 48.
Slug : legal-professional-privilege-and-three-rivers-no-6-part-3-conclusions
Meta Title : Legal Professional Privilege and Three Rivers (No 6): Part 3 - Conclusions
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Apr 17, 2008, 04:23 AM
Article ID : 89181

Charles Prest, Barrister, 6 Park Square, Leeds.

This is the third and final article in a series about legal professional privilege (LPP) in the light of the decision of the House of Lords in Three Rivers District Council v Governor and Company of the Bank of England (No 6) [2004] UKHL 48. The first article specifically addressed legal advice privilege (LAP), one of the two subheadings of LPP. The second addressed litigation privilege (LP), the second of those two subheadings. This third article provides a summary of the conclusions reached in the previous articles, some comment about where the law currently stands on the matter and a postscript drawing solicitors' attention to certain changes in their rules of professional conduct.

See November [2006] Fam Law for the full article.

Categories :
  • Articles
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from