Mrs A L Lazkano Agerre Respondent (1): Freespee Limited Respondent (2): Darian Sims Respondent (3): Stephanie Duprat Nee Toubol-Lazarus v Respondent — 2023

This judgment concerned the Claimant's application for specific disclosure heard on 15 September 2023. The parties agreed that the first issue was whether the Third Respondent could act in the capacity of a lawyer for the purposes of legal advice privilege. The Claimant relied on the fact that the Third Respondent had been suspended from the register in France in 2013 and was not registered as a solicitor, barrister or legal executive in England; the Respondents relied on authority that legal advice privilege can apply to communications with an in-house lawyer acting in that functional capacity.

The tribunal held that the Third Respondent, although foreign-qualified and not currently registered in France, had capacity to give legal advice as an in-house lawyer. Having read the privileged documents, the tribunal found that up to the point the Claimant put in her grievance the Third Respondent was giving advice to the First Respondent in her capacity as legal counsel, and that the dominant purpose of the communications was legal advice. After the grievance had been raised, the tribunal held that the documents were also protected by legal advice privilege and, because litigation was reasonably in contemplation, by litigation privilege.

The tribunal rejected the suggestion that any iniquity exception applied. It therefore dismissed the Claimant's application for specific disclosure.