Advocacy
Professional Privilege in the EU
The Akzo Decision Strikes A Blow To Concept Of Legal Professional Privilege To In-House Counsel
On September 17, 2007, the European Court of First Instance rejected demands to extend the scope of legal professional privilege to communications between parties and their in-house lawyers.
The Akzo Nobel Chemicals Limited and Akros Chemicals Limited v Commission of the European Communities The ruling held that EU law should continue to follow the 1982 judgment of the European Court of Justice that held that privilege did not extend to internal communications involving in-house lawyers, and did not protect them from disclosure during competition investigations by the EU Commission.
The new decision confirms that protection only applies to communications with "independent lawyers", which does not include lawyers bound by a "relationship of employment.”
The Association of Corporate Counsel, with pro bono support from lawyers at Covington & Burling, Intervened in the Akzo case in support of extending legal professional privilege to in-house lawyers, and strongly believes the European Court missed an important opportunity to recognize the increased status and role of in-house lawyers in today's commercial world and to modernize the concept of legal professional privilege.
PRIVILEGE RESOURCES
MEDIA
LAW FIRM RELEASES
- European Court of First Instance Holds Communications by Company Executives With In-House Lawyers are Not Privileged - Watchell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz
- Legal Professional Privilege and the Akzo Judgment - Bird & Bird
- Antitrust Update - Howrey
- European Commission to pay compensation for illegal merger prohibition decision - Lawrence Graham LLP
- Akzo Nobel v Commission: CFI confirms that legal professional privilege in competition cases does not apply to in-house lawyers - Berwin Leighton Paisner
- No legal professional privilege for in-house lawyers in EU competition case - CMS Cameron McKenna
- Legal professional privilege in the context of EC competition law - Denton Wilde Sapte LLP
- EU court dismisses Akzo claim for legal privilege for in-house lawyers UPDATE - Sharewatch
- CFI ruling in Akzo – No privilege for in-house lawyers - Herbert Smith
- Akzo Judgment: The CFI Clarifies Scope and Procedural Safeguards for Claims of Legal Professional Privilege - Latham & Watkins
- EU Court Decision: No Attorney Client Privilege for In-House Counsel - Baker Botts LLP
- The Court of First Instance clarifies the extent of legal professional privilege in European Commission competition cases issue - Eversheds
- Antitrust Law Blog
- EU court clarifies legal privilege in European competition investigations - Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer
- Akzo: CFI denies in-house counsel legal privilege, but clarifies procedure and recognizes privilege for certain compliance audits - Cleary Gottlieb Steen Hamilton LLP
- Euro court rules on in-house legal professional privilege - Shepherd & Wedderburn LLP