M and W Grazebrook Ltd v Wallens: 1973

Communications between the client and his non-lawyer representative, and communications between that representative and third party witnesses, are privileged despite the fact that the representative may have no professional qualification. Sir John Donaldson said: ‘Before industrial tribunals it is the rule, rather than the exception, for parties to be represented by persons other than lawyers. Indeed, it is the policy of Parliament to encourage such representation. If the law to be applied to industrial tribunals were not as stated in the note in the county court rules: ‘Communications not only with legal advisers, but with other agents, with an actual view to the litigation in hand, and the mode of conduct of it, also are privileged’], the position would arise that, for example, a personnel officer, when examining as a witness a works foreman, could, at the end of the works foreman’s evidence, be called upon to hand over the proof of evidence from which he had been examining the witness. Obviously, that would be a wholly untenable situation.’
Sir John Donaldson
[1973] ICR 256
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedPrudential Plc and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax and Another Admn 14-Oct-2009
The company had obtained legal advice but had taken it from their accountants. The Revenue sought its disclosure, and the company said that as legal advice it was protected by legal professional privilege.
Held: The material was not protected. . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 March 2021; Ref: scu.376226