find the latest legal job
Legal Inhouse / Lawyer / Company Secretary
Category: Other | Location: Brisbane QLD 4000
· Fantastic Company · Potential to be Part Time / Flexible Work Pattern
View details
Part Time Risk & Compliance Officer
Category: Other | Location: Brisbane QLD 4000
· Brisbane City · Flexible Part Time Hours
View details
Infrastructure Lawyer/SA
Category: Construction Law | Location: Sydney CBD, Inner West & Eastern Suburbs Sydney NSW
· Global elite law firm · Dedicated Infrastructure team
View details
In-House Legal Counsel (Mid to Senior)| Regulated Markets (Energy and Gas)
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: Melbourne CBD & Inner Suburbs Melbourne VIC
· Full PD on Request · Exciting High Impact Role
View details
Family Lawyer
Category: Family Law | Location: Eastern Suburbs Melbourne VIC
· Boutique Firm · Great Reputation
View details
ACT court clarifies in-house privilege

ACT court clarifies in-house privilege

WHILE A PRACTISING certificate may be useful to in-house legal advisers, the failure to have one will not automatically void legal professional privilege, according to the ACT Court of Appeal.…

WHILE A PRACTISING certificate may be useful to in-house legal advisers, the failure to have one will not automatically void legal professional privilege, according to the ACT Court of Appeal.

Government in-house legal counsel breathed a sigh of relief recently when the Court established exactly when their legal advice is privileged. In Commonwealth of Australia v Vance [2005] ACTCA 35 (23 August 2005), the Court assessed whether certain documents prepared by legal advisers in the Department of Defence could be subject to a claim of legal professional privilege.

The appeal of the ACT Supreme Court decision in Commonwealth of Australian and Air Marshall Errol John McCormack, means that in-house advisers who are admitted as lawyers, but who do not hold a practising certificate, are able to claim legal professional privilege over legal advice that they have created.

Justices Gray, Connolly and Tamberlin had to determine whether Justice Crispin had erred in introducing the requirement that a professional privilege claim could only be brought where a document was written by a person holding a practising certificate.

Like this story? Read more:

QLS condemns actions of disgraced lawyer as ‘stain on the profession’

NSW proposes big justice reforms to target risk of reoffending

The legal budget breakdown 2017

ACT court clarifies in-house privilege
lawyersweekly logo
Promoted content
Recommended by Spike Native Network
more from lawyers weekly
Anti-radicalisation programs playing ‘second fiddle’ to terrorism laws
Several academics have questioned the balance between Australia’s counterterrorism legislation and...
 William Ah Ket
‘Bamboo ceiling’ thought piece wins inaugural law prize
A paper that explores the idea of affirmative action to achieve greater diversity among members of A...
Nov 22 2017
Reduced investment protections will make robust commercial arbitration mechanisms all the more critical for investors
Promoted by Maxwell Chambers. This article discusses the current trend away from investor protect...
Allens managing partner Richard Spurio, image courtesy Allens' website
Jun 21 2017
Promo season at Allens
A group of lawyers at Allens have received promotions across its PNG and Australian offices. ...
May 11 2017
Partner exits for in-house role
A Victorian lawyer has left the partnership of a national firm to start a new gig with state governm...
Esteban Gomez
May 11 2017
National firm recruits ‘major asset’
A national law firm has announced it has appointed a new corporate partner who brings over 15 years'...
Nicole Rich
May 16 2017
Access to justice for young transgender Australians
Reform is looming for the process that young transgender Australians and their families must current...
Geoff Roberson
May 11 2017
The lighter side of the law: when law and comedy collide
On the face of it, there doesn’t seem to be much that is amusing about the law, writes Geoff Rober...
May 10 2017
Advocate’s immunity – without fear or without favour but not both
On 29 March 2017, the High Court handed down its decision in David Kendirjian v Eugene Lepore & ...