A7.226 DOTAS—scope of legal professional privilegeThis article discusses the scope of legal professional privilege. For a more detailed case law discussion on the subject, see A7.227.For a discussion of legal professional privilege in the context of: • provision of information to HMRC under HMRC's general information and compliance powers, see A6.604 • the disclosure of tax avoidance schemes (DOTAS) regime, see A7.225 and A7.228 • the penalties for enablers of defeated tax avoidance, see A4.573ADefinition of legal professional privilegeUnder common law a client can assert confidentiality in relation to: • communications between the client and their lawyer made for the purpose of obtaining and giving legal advice • communications between the client or their lawyer and third parties the dominant purpose of which was the preparation for actual or contemplated litigation, and • items enclosed with or referred to in such communications and brought into existence for the purpose of obtaining the adviceIn the House of Lords case of Francis & Francis1 both Lord Griffiths and Lord Goff thought that the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, s 10 was intended to be a statutory
This article discusses the scope of legal professional privilege. For a more detailed case law discussion on the subject, see A7.227.
For a discussion of legal professional privilege in the context of:
• provision of information to HMRC under HMRC's general information and compliance powers, see A6.604
• the disclosure of tax avoidance schemes (DOTAS) regime, see A7.225 and A7.228
• the penalties for enablers of defeated tax avoidance, see A4.573A
Under common law a client can assert confidentiality in relation to:
• communications between the client and their lawyer made for the purpose of obtaining and giving legal advice
• communications between the client or their lawyer and third parties the dominant purpose of which was the preparation for actual or contemplated litigation, and
• items enclosed with or referred to in such communications and brought into existence for the purpose of obtaining the advice
In the House of Lords case of Francis & Francis1 both Lord Griffiths and Lord Goff thought that the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, s 10 was intended to be a statutory
**Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason.