A recent ruling by a European Union judge that attorney-client privilege doesn’t extend to in-house lawyers didn’t change anything. It just continued what’s been the status quo in Europe for almost three decades now. But while corporate counsel are disappointed by the judge’s decision, they’re really ticked off by her reasoning. She wrote that they don’t deserve the protection of privilege because they aren’t “independent”—in essence saying that they’re more loyal to their employers than to the law.
In her April 29 opinion, Advocate General Juliane Kokott rejected arguments that a company benefits from the advice of staff attorneys who are familiar with its operations and trusted by its management. “It is precisely that special proximity to the undertaking,” Kokott wrote, “which calls the independence of the enrolled in-house lawyer seriously into question.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
