You might also be interested in
Replies (9)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
Privilege
I remember the 80's and Parliament ending the closed shop and restrictive practices, evidently the Bar and Law Societies are not trades unions or closed shops nor do they have restrictive practices. Watch out though, the law of unexpected consequences will apply. A campaign to prevent LPP apllying only to these two bodies could equally result in it being removed altogether.
Finally, I understood accountancy was the second oldest profession and law the oldest. It was a consequence of having to sort the mess made by the oldest.
Legal privilege
I must confess to some incomprehension on this issue. Surely the clue is in the term "Legal privilege"? If Parliament had wanted to include accountants then I would have thought that the Parliamentary draftsman would have called this "Legal and accountancy privilege".
I will add to John's comments and possible bias ( aka self-preservation ) and point out that Parliament generally contains very many more lawyers than accountants.
Peter Lashmar
Lashmars Tax Accountants
Oldest profession
I had always understood that the "oldest profession" was an altogether different and more personal type of service - far predating the Law and Luca Pacioli.
Peter Lashmar
on a Friday
The clue is indeed in the name...
In the same way that it is not "Legal and accountancy privilege" it is not "Legal profession privilege".
There are broadly two types of privilege. Litigation Privilege which will hardly, if ever, affect accountants giving advice. But there is also "Legal Advice Privilege" - a common sense (as opposed to lawyers judging on matters that help lawyers) interpretation is that it attaches to the legal advice, not who gave it.
The decision must be correct
If accountants were to be permitted to claim legal privilege then so would anyone providing legal advice (however bad or inadequate). Anyway, I wouldn't want a solicitor or barrister doing my books (by their own admission they usually find the accountancy components of their professional exams the hardest) and so I am happy to leave legal advice to them!
unusually i thought part of the judges Ratio is unsound
but he does make some fair points additionally
leagal privelige effectively relates to discloure of client documentation information
i wonder if there are as many good tax lawyers who indrstnd that as well as say a qualified accoutant
Legal advice privilege v litigation privilege.
Advice given, even by non-lawyers, is subject to litigation privilege if it is given for the dominant purpose of litigation, including how to avoid it and how to be best placed should it occur: Scotthorne v Four Seasons Conservatories (UK) Ltd (2010) Employment Appeal Tribunal, 14 May 2010 (Case No.0178/10) per McMullen QC.
At the original employment tribunal hearing, the employment judge ruled (wrongly) that documents belonging to an employer which a claimant wanted to view were 'protected by legal advice privilege.' However, on appeal to the EAT, HHJ McMullen QC agreed with the employment judge that the documents could not be disclosed but for a different reason which was they were protected by litigation privilege.
A distraction - oldest profession
As Peter said it's the ladies of the night although some will have it it's seaman needing servicing who are the oldest.
But the legal profession is in the UK still a closed shop. Other jurisdictions are slowly chipping away at the exclusivity with registered accountants able to do much of what was restricted. Legal privilige is however a well defended position which the legal profession will fight for tooth and nail.