By Legal Futures
7 November 2011
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to intervene in the high-profile Supreme Court case on whether the right to claim legal professional privilege (LPP) should extend beyond the clients of solicitors and barristers.
It will also call on the court to encourage legislation “promptly” that provides regulators with clearer guidance on LPP.
The long-running case – Prudential PLC and Prudential (Gibraltar) Limited v Special Commissioner of Income Tax and Philip Pandolfo (HM Inspector of Taxes) – centres on whether LPP should extend to tax law advice provided by accountants.
The Court of Appeal ruled in October 2010 that LPP is only applicable to solicitors and barristers. The LSB may seek to join the Law Society, Bar Standards Board and Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW) by intervening in the Supreme Court.
The board’s concern is that the courts have traditionally held LPP as a common law right, only applicable to solicitors and barristers, yet section 190 of the Legal Service Act grants it to any authorised person providing the main reserved legal services.
The problem is a live one since two accountancy bodies – the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants and the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Scotland – are already approved regulators for the grant of probate rights (although neither has yet to activate their powers), while the ICAEW is poised to apply for probate authorisation in 2012 and in time may seek to become a licensing authority for alternative business structures.
Depending on how the Supreme Court decides, the LSB could find itself at odds with the ruling and open to challenge when exercising several of its statutory duties, including whether a particular legal activity should be reserved or removed from reservation.
In a paper to a recent board meeting, the LSB said the Supreme Court must ensure “an equitable and transparent approach to the granting of privilege”.
The LSB claimed that clarity can be achieved either through judicial guidance or through Parliament (which was the Court of Appeal’s suggestion).
It said the ideal outcome would include the court ruling that privilege could be granted to any authorised person – even if not a solicitor or barrister – for a reserved legal activity so long as their regulator addresses LPP issues within its regime.
The LSB also hoped the court will “provide clear encouragement to Parliament to address this issue promptly through legislation”.
Tags: legal professional privilege, Legal Services Board
Leave a comment
* Denotes required fieldLegal Futures Blog
Why your firm should support working mothers to the hilt

If you are going to balance the demands of work and childcare, and stay sane, you need to adapt, and with any luck your firm will adapt with you. In doing so you will both win, and your respective productivity will soar. When I had my son, I realised just how lucky I was. Not only did I have the incredible support of my, and my husband’s, family through this life-changing time, but I had a firm that offered me complete flexibility and control over my return to business life.
Associate News
More firms choose Tikit P4W for practice and case management in what has been a record sales year for Tikit
Eclipse announces new functionality to cater for the Precedent S Electronic Bill of Costs
Legal Eye strengthens team with new appointment
Chair of the Law Society Board to open Teal Compliance Conference
UK law firms expect long-term decline in work in the event of ‘no-deal’ Brexit
3 questions to ask when creating the IT platform for your new software
Livingstons Solicitors, the latest firm to select Linetime’s matter management