JULY / AUGUST 2008
Why privilege rules need to be reformed
Attorney-client privilege is an increasingly contentious issue worldwide. Jochen Bühling and Michael Jewess introduce a series of jurisdiction-based Q&A articles
| One-minute read |
| Established rules on privilege in many jurisdictions allow clients to withhold disclosure of communications with their legal advisers. But, however framed, privilege raises questions such as which communications can be withheld, whether it applies to in-house counsel and whether it can be extended to overseas advisers. In the IP context, there is the further complication that many states have different rules for lawyers and non-lawyer IP practitioners. WIPO and AIPPI held a Conference in May this year to look at the issue and the ambiguities have led the ICC to call for an international treaty to provide clarity. A review of the law in seven key jurisdictions confirms that many questions and inconsistencies remain, but clients can follow practical advice on obtaining and maintaining privilege and resolving any dilemmas that arise. |
On May 22 and 23 a conference was held in Geneva on client privilege in intellectual property professional advice. It was co-organized by WIPO and AIPPI and more than 190 government officials, representatives from NGOs and practitioners from industry and the private sector came together to debate issues of client privilege in the context of advice given by non-lawyer IP advisers.
The rest of this article is available to subscribers only. Subscribe today for full access to this article.
Alternatively take a free trial, giving you access to the current issue's contents*
If you are already a subscriber, please log in below to access the rest of this article.
*excludes some surveys and articles.