In the United States, we take for granted that a lawyer is a lawyer, and that those who practice as in-house attorneys are no less professional, ethical and independent than outside counsel who act for clients. This view, though, is not necessarily shared around the world, and we take note of a disturbing trend in one significant quarter that continues to challenge the equality of lawyers who choose to practice in house.
We previously expressed concern about the ramifications of the decision in Akzo Nobel Chemicals Ltd. v. Commission, in which the European Court of Justice rejected claims of privilege for in-house legal counsel due to a claimed lack of independence. That case raised concerns about how companies, and even outside counsel dealing with those companies, could preserve appropriate client confidences. The issues are neither academic nor limited to “big law” international practitioners as legal practice becomes more globalized at all levels.
This content has been archived.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]