New Zealand: Testing the Boundaries of Legal Privilege

Last Updated: 28 September 2010
Article by Daniel Kalderimis

The appropriate boundaries of legal privilege have been considered recently by senior appellate courts both here and in Europe, with markedly different outcomes. 

The judgments deal with different types of legal privilege - the European Court of Justice (ECJ) with legal professional privilege and the New Zealand Supreme Court with litigation privilege.  Taken together, however, they illustrate some important underlying differences in approach between the different jurisdictions.

Akzo Nobel Chemicals Ltd and Akcros Chemicals Ltd v European Commission (Case C 550/07 P)

Akzo Nobel arose as a consequence of an investigation of Akzo and Akcros by the European Commission (EC) for suspected breaches of European competition law. During inspections of the business premises of the two plastics companies in February 2003, the EC took copies of a number of communications between executives and in-house legal counsel.  Akzo and Akcros objected to the EC's subsequent use of those communications in its investigations on the grounds that they were covered by legal professional privilege.

In September 2007, the European Court of First Instance ruled that privilege did not apply to the communications. This finding was based on the longstanding precedent of AM & S v Commission [1982] ECR 1575, which established that privilege only applied to communications with a lawyer who is "not bound to the client by a relationship of employment".  In-house counsel, such as those employed by Akzo, were accordingly not entitled to claim privilege over their communications because they lacked the necessary independence.

Akzo and Akcros appealed to the ECJ. As part of that Court's process, the Advocate General provided an opinion to the Court (released in May this year and the subject of a previous Brief Counsel), which concluded that, notwithstanding the considerable growth in the use of in-house counsel since 1982, the distinction in AM & S ought to be maintained.

In its 14 September 2010 judgment, the 11-member ECJ substantially adopted the Advocate General's reasoning.  The ECJ held that "despite the fact that he may be enrolled with a Bar or Law Society and that he is subject to a certain number of professional ethical obligations, an in-house lawyer does not enjoy a level of professional independence equal to that of external lawyers".  This reasoning was based on the "economic dependence and personal identification of a lawyer in an employment relationship" in the in-house context. 

The EC'[s decision may come as a surprise in New Zealand, where little distinction is made between in-house and external counsel in terms of claims to privilege.  It does, however, reflect the approach taken in the domestic law of many of the primarily civil law legal systems of EU Member States.  While legal professional privilege is recognised by all 27 Members of the EU (protected at varying levels from case law through statute to state constitutions, as well as in the ECHR and Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union), a large number of Member States still exclude correspondence with in-house lawyers from this protection.  The ECJ could discern "no predominant trend" of change in this respect and therefore considered that "the legal situation in the Member States of the European Union has not evolved, since the judgment in AM & S v Commission was delivered, to an extent which would justify a change".

The judgment has predictably drawn strong criticism from those European jurisdictions in the minority, such as the UK and the Netherlands, where domestic laws allow claims to legal professional privilege on the basis of advice from in-house counsel.  As one prominent English competition lawyer has pointed out,1 the judgment maintains a situation in which an investigation of a British company carried out by the UK Office of Fair Trading, even where such an investigation is on behalf of the EC, will be bound to respect the privilege of in-house legal communications, yet an identical investigation carried out directly by the EC will not.

In New Zealand, claims to legal professional privilege on the basis of advice from in house counsel remain valid.  In our view, this position reflects the logic and consistency of our privilege laws.  Here, the purpose and subject matter of the communication is central – where information is provided for the purpose of obtaining legal advice, privilege will exist, including when legal advice is sought from in-house counsel.  Equally, non-legal communications or advice from a lawyer will not be privileged, even if that lawyer is external.  While the provision of such non-legal advice may occur more frequently in the in-house context, New Zealand law does not elevate this empirical generalisation into a blanket principle distinguishing the two forms of legal engagement.  Any attempt to relegate in-house counsel to 'second class status' along the lines of Akzo should, we consider, be firmly resisted in this jurisdiction.

Jeffries v Privacy Commissioner [2010] NZSC 99

In Jeffries, the New Zealand Supreme Court applied – albeit in a different context from Azko – a resolutely principled approach to defining the boundaries of legal privilege.

This case arose out of a commercial dispute in which Mr Jeffries was instructed to recover unpaid architect's fees.  During the course of the dispute it became apparent that Jeffries held considerable immigration information about the American couple from whom he was seeking payment.  The couple complained to the Privacy Commissioner, who instructed Jeffries to disclose the information he had obtained, and the circumstances of his coming into possession of it, under the Privacy Act 1993.

Jeffries judicially reviewed the Privacy Commissioner's instruction on a number of grounds in the High Court and Court of Appeal.  The claim of privilege was first raised in argument before the Court of Appeal, on the grounds that the information sought had been used in preparing an application to the District Court and was thus covered by litigation privilege.  Somewhat surprisingly, the Appeal Court ruled that because the communication was unsolicited, it could not have been received for the purpose of conducting litigation; thus, litigation privilege did not apply. 

That reasoning was rejected by the Supreme Court.

Questions of litigation privilege in New Zealand are now covered by s 56 of the Evidence Act 2006, which provides that the privilege applies whenever "the communication or information is made, received, compiled, or prepared for the dominant purpose of preparing for a proceeding or an apprehended proceeding".  This "dominant purpose" test codifies the previous common law position. 

The Supreme Court considered that imposing a condition that s 56 applied only to communications obtained as a result of a lawyer's investigation would erroneously "introduce a significant qualification to the language of the provision, which is neutral as to the manner in which the information is obtained".  Considering the authorities, the Supreme Court found none that "suggest a requirement that the lawyer or party has commissioned or otherwise sought the communication or information provided" for privilege to apply.  In fact, such authority as there was suggested the opposite conclusion.  On that basis, the Supreme Court held that so long as the "dominant purpose" test is met, privilege attaches to the relevant material "however obtained", in line with a policy of "broad protection for the preparation for litigation".
As to the particular information in this case, the Supreme Court noted that under s 94 of the Privacy Act, the proper person to assess claims of privilege over information requested by the Privacy Commissioner is, in the first instance, the Commissioner herself.  The late introduction of privilege as an additional ground of judicial review had not allowed such an assessment to occur.  The Supreme Court therefore dismissed Jeffries' appeal, requiring the information to be submitted to the Privacy Commissioner for a decision on privilege to be made.

The Supreme Court also held that the identity of the person communicating the information could be covered by privilege.  In remitting the question to the Privacy Commissioner for determination, however, the Supreme Court again expressed no view as to whether that was the case before it.

The Supreme Court's decision confirms the orthodox application of privilege principles in New Zealand and is, in our view, to be welcomed.

1. Julianne O'Leary, "Privilege judgment is an unjustified blow to in-house lawyers", The Guardian, 14 September 2010

The information in this article is for informative purposes only and should not be relied on as legal advice. Please contact Chapman Tripp for advice tailored to your situation.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:
  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.
  • Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.
    If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here
    If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq you may opt out by clicking here

    Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

    Use of

    You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


    Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

    The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


    Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

    • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
    • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
    • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

    Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

    Information Collection and Use

    We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

    We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

    Mondaq News Alerts

    In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


    A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

    Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

    Log Files

    We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


    This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

    Surveys & Contests

    From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


    If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


    From time to time Mondaq may send you emails promoting Mondaq services including new services. You may opt out of receiving such emails by clicking below.

    *** If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of services offered by Mondaq you may opt out by clicking here .


    This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

    Correcting/Updating Personal Information

    If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

    Notification of Changes

    If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

    How to contact Mondaq

    You can contact us with comments or queries at

    If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.

    By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions