Dutch chemical company Akzo Nobel lost a case at the Court of
First Instance (DFI) last year over the European Commission's
seizure of internal documents in a price-fixing investigation. It
had argued that the documents were protected by lawyer-client
confidentiality. Akzo has appealed the case to the European Court
of Justice (ECJ).
The Law Society wants the ECJ to allow it to put arguments in
favour of retaining client confidentiality even for internal
lawyers. It wants to argue that its own regulation of the
profession is sufficient to ensure "independence and
integrity".
"It is time for the EU court to update its case law," said Des
Hudson, the chief executive of the Law Society. "The Society will
argue that the CFI's decision represents a threat to the right of
clients to communicate openly and in confidence with their in-house
lawyers, a privilege which is crucial in the business
community."
"[Legal professional privilege] LPP is a fundamental principle
of the rule of law and of human rights, in particular the right to
a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human
Rights, and any exception to that principle must be shown to be
necessary," said the Law Society in its official submission to the
Court to be allowed to participate in the case.
The Society argues that it should be allowed to participate
under the Statues of the ECJ, which say that intervention is
permitted by member states and institutions of the European
community, and "any other person establishing an interest in the
result of any case submitted to the Court".
Its submission argues that "the ability of solicitors to give
rapid advice freely to their clients is severely restricted" by the
CFI ruling.
The Society argues in its paper that in-house counsel are just
as closely bound by Law Society regulations demanding independence
and integrity as private practice lawyers are.
"It is …crucial that all members of the profession are treated
equally," said Hudson. "The advice of all solicitors, who are bound
by the Society's high professional standards and disciplinary
measures, should be afforded the same level of protection."
The European Commission seized Akzo documents in 2003 and Akzo
sought to protect them under legal privilege. The documents were
held in escrow pending the CFI case. The CFI ordered their release
last September.
