In R (on the application of Prudential plc) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax Prudential sought to claim legal advice privilege in respect of legal advice provided by PricewaterhouseCoopers (“PwC”) who had devised a marketed tax avoidance scheme which PwC adapted for the benefit of the Prudential group of companies, who implemented the scheme through a series of transactions. Prudential refused to disclose certain documents to the inspector of taxes on the ground that legal advice privilege applied because they related to PwC giving them legal advice in connection with the transactions. The Supreme Court held, by a majority of five to two, that legal advice privilege cannot be extended to communications in connection with advice given by professional people other than lawyers, even where that advice is legal advice which that professional person is qualified to give. To do so would extend legal advice privilege beyond what are currently, and have for a long time been, understood to be its limits.
Comment: The ruling by the Supreme Court confirms that it continues to be the case that only legal advice given by members of the legal profession to their clients is protected by privilege (except where the subject matter of that advice is connected with litigation). That protection is denied for the same legal advice emanating from any other profession.
This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, we cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
