Sign in / up

back to article No legal privilege for accountants, says Court of Appeal

The right to keep correspondence and documents relating to legal advice secret does not exist when the person giving the advice is an accountant, the Court of Appeal has ruled. Legal professional privilege (LPP) is the right of a person or company to communicate with their lawyer in secret. Even in a trial that communication …

COMMENTS

House rules Send corrections
This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Neal 5

    Tory party coffers

    may get an unexpected boost soon enough.

    1 0
  2. Colin Millar
    Thumb Down

    LPP should be restricted - not widened

    The privelege is needed because of the adversarial system of justice and the idea that one shouldn't have to show one's hand. Widening it to proffessional advisers would only benefit those who can afford such and make it even more difficult to get information out of big business and government.

    Especially as far as non-criminal law is concerned (but maybe also for criminal law too) it might be time to move towards an inquisitorial system and dispense with LPP. Then justice might be able to concern itself more with truth than jurisprudence.

    4 1
  3. heyrick Silver badge

    Non-lawyers can give legal advice

    "and allow legal advice to be protected by LPP when it was given by accountants rather than lawyers."

    Are these non-lawyers bound by the same rules, or is there a million little clauses to exempt them from the accuracy of their advice?

    Between you and me, I think LPP would be better disbanded so we can look forward to a legal system that attempts to serve justice as opposed to who can argue better while advising their client on how to/not not respond.

    2 0
    1. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Are these non-lawyers bound by the same rules

      Yep:

      http://www.icaew.com/index.cfm/route/143703/icaew_ga/en/Members/Support/Professional_conduct/Members_Handbook/Members_Handbook

      0 0
  4. Marcus Aurelius

    Simples

    Now watch every accountant in the country either employ a solicitor and route advice through that solicitor so that it is legally privileged information. Alternatively watch accountants perform the minimum training required so that their advice can be regarded as "legal" advice rather than financial advice.

    ..accountants are past masters at finding ways to get the laws to do what they want, so the fact even I can see that you can drive a truck through the loopholes in this ruling implies its not a very good one....

    1 0
  5. Tom 13
    Heart

    Be still my beating heart!

    "It was not what the law said, though, said the Court, and changing the law is the job of Parliament not judges."

    Can we borrow those judges for a year or so to teach law on this side of the pond? Please? Pretty Please?

    I promise we will return them after a year.

    0 0
  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    RIPA trumps *everything*

    Privileged documents have to be turned over to the police under a RIPA request - so privilege doesn't exist anymore.

    1 1
    1. Arthur Dent
      Reply Icon
      FAIL

      re: RIPA trumps *everything

      No it doesn't.

      If the authorities have in their possession an encrypted copy of what would have been, did they not have that copy, a privileged document and acquired it in such a manner that the acquisition did not breach privilege, then they can require an unencrypted copy (or in some circumstances a decryption key) to be provided.

      That doesn't enable them to acquire a privileged document, just to acquire a plain text copy of a document that properly and legally came to be in their possession in encrypted form without any breach of privilage.

      Unless I've misunderstood it all completely; I'm not a lawyer.

      0 0
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Grenade

        Sorry, you do misunderstand

        A case which went to the HoL

        McE v Prison Service of Northern Ireland and Another

        C and C v Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland

        M v Same:

        are three cases, which revolved around the covert

        recording of conversations between a solicitor and a suspect, and a

        Psychiatrist and a patient in custody. Basically their Lordships held

        that RIPA enabled interception of communications, because it was

        Parliaments express intention to do so.

        1 0
      2. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        FAIL

        ...if you're not a lawyer ...

        why post as if you were ?

        http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/reports/article5891054.ece

        1 0
  7. Rogerborg

    FOR GREAT JUSTICE!

    Well, sure, if truckers can't tell their brief that "Yeah, I strangled all those prossies, but they wuz asking for it," then how can they enjoy their right to an effective defence?

    1 1
    1. Marcus Aurelius
      Reply Icon
      Troll

      Even under current law

      If said trucker admits the actual act to any "officer of the court" which means solicitor, barrister or anyone else, then the barrister is obliged to disclose those facts.

      Its the barristers job to present the information he has been provided in the best possible light i.e translate the "they wuz asking for it" bit into "its all their fault and my client is blameless for doing what needed to be done"

      0 0
  8. Pascal Monett Silver badge

    "such protection would be reasonable"

    No it wouldn't. If legal counsel protection was extended to accountants, then all the instances of "cooking the books" would become cast-iron procedures and there would be no way to uncover such shenanigans.

    Lawyers can lie, but they're generally known to get criminals off the hook by legal means, not illegal ones.

    Accountants, on the other hand, can be responsible for the worst economic crisis of our time. No legal professional privilege for them, ever.

    0 0
This topic is closed for new posts.