http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2013/418.html

EVIDENCE – privilege – client legal privilege – whether an adequate description of documents, over which privilege is claimed, has been provided – Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) rr 21.3 and 21.4 – whether privilege properly claimed – inspection of privileged material – DISCOVERY – relevance – Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 21.1(2).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2013/403.html

EVIDENCE – sections 118 and 124 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) – admissibility of admissions made by a party to a barrister previously retained jointly by the parties

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2013/212.html

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – lawyers – client legal privilege – waiver of – inconsistency between claims made and maintenance of the privilege – claim for mental harm – incapacity to conduct business or litigation alleged – documents seeking and providing instructions to solicitors in other litigation – privilege waived

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/tas/TASSC/2012/68.html

Administration Law – Judicial review – Generally – Declaration – Integrity Commission – Notice served by – Notice required the production of documents – Validity.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2012/1052.html

PROCEDURE – claim of conversion and detinue – discovery – application by plaintiff to cross-examine third defendant in relation to alleged insufficient discovery – application by defendants for discovery of documents – claim of legal professional privilege by plaintiff – application to file cross-claim – HELD – grant plaintiff’s application to cross-examine third defendant – grant defendants’ application for discovery – grant application to file cross-claim

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2012/1118.html

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – subpoena to non party – claim for legal professional privilege and common interest privilege – onus of establishing matters relevant to either claim – whether either claim made out

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2012/1092.html

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – subpoena to non party – claim for legal professional privilege and common interest privilege – onus of establishing matters relevant to either claim – whether either claim made out

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/act/ACTSC/2012/115.html

PROCEDURE – discovery and interrogatories – whether witness statements form part of an investigator’s report – witness statements were obtained at the same time and prepared by the same person as the investigator’s report – witness statements are the basis for the investigator’s report – found that the witness statements are part of the investigator’s report

Evidence Act 2011 (ACT), s 118

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWCCA/2012/12.html

CRIMINAL LAW – appeal – conviction – admissions – s 90 Evidence Ac 1995 – whether the trial judge should have admitted admissions made by an accused to a community support person.

CRIMINAL LAW – appeal – conviction – misdirection in presentation of defence case to jury – whether self-defence should have been put to the jury.

CRIMINAL LAW – appeal – sentence – wrong statutory ratio of parole to non-parole period – s 44 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

CRIMINAL LAW – appeal – sentence – whether the sentence was manifestly excessive – whether trial judge considered all mitigating factors – s 21A(3) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 90, 118, 126, 127

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCA/2012/29.html

EVIDENCE – legal professional privilege – privilege claimed over documents obtained pursuant to search warrants and summons under the Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 (Cth) and Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) – whether Australian Crime Commission (ACC) entitled to inspect

EVIDENCE – whether documents subject to legal professional privilege – applicable principles – Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) not relevant – no issue of admissibility of evidence – issue to be determined under common law – legal professional privilege a fundamental common law immunity – whether reference to common law is to common law of Australia

PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW – choice of law – whether right to inspect documents seized under Australian statute gives rise to choice of law question – question of statutory interpretation – no choice of law question – issue governed by Australian principles of legal professional privilege

PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW – if choice of law question arises whether Australian choice of law principles apply

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2011/1419.html

PROCEDURE – civil – privilege – common interest privilege – communication between administrators’ lawyers and former lawyers of company in administration relating to litigation brought by plaintiff against company- anticipated proceedings by plaintiff if its proof of debt rejected – raise same issues – administrators and company have common interest in relation to proceedings

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2004/40.html

[Client Legal Privilege] – Motion for access to documentsproduced on subpoena – Objection to access on ground that documents consisting of pleadings, affidavits and particulars filed and served in other proceedings are privileged and were filed and served under compulsion of law (s.122 (2) (c) – Claim that pleadings and/or affidavits are not privileged so that s122 (2) (c) does not apply – Alternative application for access pursuant to Part 65 rule 7 and Practice Note 97.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2011/754.html

PROCEDURE – subpoena – documents produced – access – legal professional privilege – third party documents – litigation or advice privilege – whether relevant difference

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCA/2011/482.html

1. This proceeding was commenced on 18 April 2011 when the plaintiff approached the corporations duty judge for orders abridging the time for the service of its Originating Process and affidavit in support. In that Process, the plaintiff claimed urgent interlocutory injunctive relief restraining the defendant from putting certain resolutions to its Annual General Meeting which was scheduled to be held at 10.30 am on Wednesday, 20 April 2011 at the defendant’s principal business address in Singapore.
2. The plaintiff’s application for injunctive relief was heard and determined by me on 19 April 2011 (Stratford Sun Limited v OM Holdings Limited; In the Matter of OM Holdings Limited [2011] FCA 414). The relevant facts and circumstances underpinning the plaintiff’s complaints as at 18 April 2011 are set out in that judgment.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2011/86.html

Evidence – client legal privilege – documents produced on subpoena by third party – no claim of privilege made – whether privilege lost.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2010/1514.html

EVIDENCE – Facts excluded from proof – privilege – client legal privilege and litigation privilege – Waiver of privilege – whether disclosure was obviously mistaken

(NSW) Evidence Act 1995 , s 118, s 119

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/supreme_ct/2010/1258.html

CONTRACT – termination – breach – where plaintiff entered into dealer agreements with defendant – where plaintiff terminated agreements for breach of essential terms – whether defendant failed to meet target quotas – whether plaintiff estopped from relying on failure to meet target quotas – whether misuse of confidential information – whether conflict of interest arising from negotiation and making of Canon agreements – whether uncertainty in terms – construction of conflicts of interests provisions – whether defendant’s marketing of Canon products constituted breach – where defendant alleges wrongful repudiation – whether breach by plaintiff – whether plaintiff’s termination in breach of any implied obligation of good faith or motivated by improper purpose – construction – parties’ post termination obligations under dealer agreements.
EQUITY – “unclean hands” – whether plaintiff disentitled to relief on discretionary grounds.
PROCEDURE – notice to produce – privileged documents – legal advice – reasons for ruling – Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) ss 118, 122.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/supreme_ct/2010/1288.html

PROCEDURE – time for service of originating process extended on several occasions – defendants have pending application for discharge of extension orders – existing orders require that material put before court by plaintiffs on hearing of the extension applications be kept confidential – application by defendants for discharge of confidentiality orders – held legal professional privilege waived and confidentiality no longer maintainable except as to litigation funding documents

Evidence Act 1995 , ss 118, 119, 122

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCA/2010/766.html

BANKRUPTCY – whether discharged bankrupt is entitled to bring an action under s 179(1) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth)

Held: Yes.

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – legal professional privilege – whether paragraphs of pleading put in issue the contents of privileged communications so as to waive privilege

Held: No waiver of privilege.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCAFC/2009/160.html

PRIVILEGE – Legal professional privilege – Legal advice – Whether provision of draft legislation by Parliamentary Counsel to State constitutes legal advice – Whether privilege covers communications by State to third parties for dominant purpose of seeking legal advice – Draft legislation implicitly provides privileged legal advice – Considering nature of consultative process involved in drafting instructions for draft legislation, privilege applied to draft instructions and related communications between State and third parties

PRIVILEGE – Legal professional privilege – Legal advice – Waiver of privilege – Whether State waived privilege by failing to place “use restraint” on privileged communications – Whether State waived privilege by putting privileged communications in issue – State did not act inconsistently with maintenance of confidentiality and therefore did not waive privilege

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Leave to appeal interlocutory decision – Whether decision attended by sufficient doubt – Whether substantial injustice would result if leave denied – Leave granted

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCA/2010/553.html

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – whether certain decisions and instruments made by the Australian Crime Commission were invalid because the Commission and its Board failed to comply with relevant statutory provisions governing the making of those decisions and instruments – decisions and instruments held to be valid – whether certain documents seized during the execution of a search warrant were protected from disclosure by legal professional privilege – legal professional privilege attached to some documents (but not all) – in respect of those documents originally protected by privilege, privilege held to have been waived

Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), s 118 and s 122

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2010/535.html

PROCEDURE – legal professional privilege – advice given by in-house solicitor – both legal advice, commercial advice and comment – independence of solicitor – legal advice privileged, commercial advice and comment not privileged – communication between defendants and solicitor used as basis for affidavit sworn by solicitor to defend plaintiff’s claim for summary judgment – waiver in defendants’ communication thereby established

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCA/2010/252.html

LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE – within the Attorney-General’s Department – advice concerning discretionary decision to surrender for extradition – whether the Attorney-General’s delegate is entitled to Legal Professional Privilege – whether disclosure of most, but not all, of the advice is unfair or inconsistent with a claim for legal professional privilege – whether legal professional privilege is waived

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2010/142.html

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
public interest immunity
whether documents would disclose Cabinet deliberations
whether court should inspect documents
parliamentary privilege
whether draft Question Time briefs are protected
meaning of “impeached”
EVIDENCE
client legal privilege
method of proving privilege

Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 117, 118, 130