Attorney Client Privilege Survey
© Copyright Lex Mundi Ltd. 2005
Jamaica
Myers, Fletcher & Gordon
21 East Street
P.O. Box 162
Kingston,
Jamaica
Tel 1.876.922.5860
http://www.mfg-law.com
Attorney – client privilege protects from inspection1 communications made between an attorneyat-law and his/her client.2 In order for the privilege to apply the following pre-requisites must be
satisfied:
1.
the communication must be passed within the course of an attorney and
client relationship. The mere fact that one of the parties to the communication is
an attorney does not satisfy the requirement. For example, communications to
and from a person who is an attorney will not be privileged where the attorney is
giving business advice, doing personal business or acting in an executive and not
a professional capacity;3
2.
the communication must be passed between the attorney and client : (i)
for the purpose of the attorney giving legal advice or, (ii) for the purpose of the
client seeking legal advice or, (iii) as part of a continuum so that legal advice
may later be given by the attorney to the client.
The attorney – client privilege also extends to communications between an in-house counsel and
his/her client.4 For these purposes, the company to which the in-house counsel is employed is
his/her client. Therefore, communications from the management and employees, acting as agents
of the company, to in-house counsel and vice versa may be protected from inspection by the
1
In the recent case of Jamaican Bar Association et al v D.P.P., et al (2003), HCV 207/03, HCV 238/03,
HCV 213/03, unreported, the Supreme Court of Jamaica held that privileged documents are protected from
disclosure to the other party but not from seizure in accordance with a search warrant. The scope of this
case is arguably restricted to cases involving the particular statute that was being construed by the Supreme
Court in Jamaican Bar Association v D.P.P., namely, the Mutual Assistance (Criminal Matters) Act.
2
Anderson v Bank of British Columbia [1876] 2 Ch.D 644, Balabel v Air India [1988] 2 WLR 1036.
3
Blackpool Corporation v Locker [1948] 1 All ER 85
4
Alfred Crompton Amusement Machines Limited v Customs & Excise Commissioners [1974] AC 405.
2100 West Loop South, Ste. 1000 y Houston, Texas 77027 y USAy Tel: 1.713.626.9393 y www.lexmundi.com
Attorney Client Privilege Survey
© Copyright Lex Mundi Ltd. 2005
doctrine of attorney-client privilege. Similarly, privilege may be attached to communications
between in-house counsel, acting as an agent of his/her employer company, and other attorneys
retained by the company.
2100 West Loop South, Ste. 1000 y Houston, Texas 77027 y USAy Tel: 1.713.626.9393 y www.lexmundi.com