Many in-house practitioners work in multi-national corporations. Oftentimes, their assigned business units operate across national boundaries, with legal advice delivered to business heads/executives in various parts of the world. Many jurisdictions do not recognize the attorney-client privilege, making legal advice rendered subject to disclosure/discovery. Our panel will explore the basis for the attorney-client privilege, where it does/does not exist, and how to intermarry the lack of attorney-client privilege with the way a practitioner delivers advice of counsel in an international business environment and manages litigation/discovery issues that arise.
The best general counsel are invaluable members of the business team - able to nimbly navigate between and harmonize the legal and business interests of their organizations. How do they do it? What do they expect from you? How do you manage the tension between providing legal and business advice? Join us to learn how to work with your business colleagues so that they will see you as not just legal but someone who means business. This panel will also address the ethical issues of how to navigate the attorney-client privilege and other ethical obligations while wearing "two hats" for the company.
A review of legal privilege for in-house counsel in various jurisdictions around the world.
This QuickCounsel examines the differences in attorney-client privilege between the United States and the European Union, individual European countries, Canada, Brazil, Russia, India and China.
This QuickCounsel examines the predominant tests of privilege for in-house counsel in the United States, the risks involved with communicating with branch offices in other countries, and potential protective measures an attorney may take in order to prevent the discovery of communication between an in-house lawyer and his or her corporate client.
On March 5, 2013, the Brussels Court of Appeal issued a landmark judgment recognizing that, under Belgian law, legal advice rendered by in-house counsel (and related correspondence) benefits from a protection equivalent to legal privilege. The Judgment was given in a case opposing telecommunications incumbent Belgacom to the Belgian competition authority. Pursuing a long-time effort in defense of in-house counsel privilege, Cleary Gottlieb represented pro bono the Belgian Institute for Company Lawyers as intervener in support of Belgacom.
Staats and Upton have conducted extensive research into the application of lean
principles to knowledge work, and they have identified six principles on which
organizations can draw. In this article, the
authors discuss each of these principles in detail, providing specific examples
of how such principles can be applied and implemented
In this column, the author discusses to what extent counsel can advice a client who plans to meet with the opposing party.
In-house counsel often find themselves in the unexpected role of compliance officer. Fulfilling the responsibilities associated with both roles can be challenging but also rewarding, and each demands a unique skill set. In today’s business environment, is it realistic to expect general counsel to also effectively serve as chief compliance officers? And, is this unification in the best interest of the organization?