Summary
In R (on the application of Prudential plc and another) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax and another an English court has held that legal advice privilege does not extend to cover advice about law (e.g. tax law) given by accountants.
Facts
Briefly, Prudential plc and Prudential (Gibraltar) Limited (together Prudential) were served with notices under section 20 of the Taxes Management Act 1970 in exercise of HMRC's investigatory powers. The notices were served with a view to investigate a commercially marketed tax avoidance scheme and required Prudential to disclose documents/information in relation to its tax liability.
Prudential argued that the documents required to be disclosed under the notices were covered by legal advice privilege as they related to advice about tax law, albeit from accountants. Therefore, they were not obliged to disclose the documents.
Prudential also challenged the notices on the basis that they did not seek material that was relevant to its tax liability. This challenge also failed.
Decision
Following the House of Lords (as it then was) decision in R (Morgan Grenfell) v Special Commissioners of Income Tax [2002] UKHL 21 it is an established principle that legal advice privilege is exercisable in response to a request or demand for information pursuant to investigatory powers. However this decision related to advice from, and communications with, lawyers.
In the present case the judge held that legal advice privilege does not extend to advice from, and communications with, accountants even if it relates to advice about the law.
Commentary
The approach taken by the judge is that legal advice privilege does not attach solely because of the purpose and nature of the advice but also because the advice emanates from a member of the legal profession. The justification put forward for this is that the link between legal advice privilege and members of the legal profession is a natural one given the relationship of a lawyer's professional duties, including a lawyer's duties to the court, and the administration of justice.
The judge did proceed on the basis that if an accountant acts for a client in the preparation and presentation of tax litigation then, litigation privilege would attach to any documents created pursuant to that litigation. However, this is not an extension of litigation privilege.
The present case deals with advice provided by accountants where litigation is not contemplated. This is common market practice especially in relation to tax matters. In such scenarios the advice and any information in relation to it will not benefit from legal advice privilege and a party may have to disclose documents/information, including its communications with the accountant.
Case reference: R (on the application of Prudential plc and another) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax and another [2009] EWHC 2494 (Admin). For a full copy of the judgment click here.
This article was written for Law-Now, CMS Cameron McKenna's free online information service. To register for Law-Now, please go to www.law-now.com/law-now/mondaq
Law-Now information is for general purposes and guidance only. The information and opinions expressed in all Law-Now articles are not necessarily comprehensive and do not purport to give professional or legal advice. All Law-Now information relates to circumstances prevailing at the date of its original publication and may not have been updated to reflect subsequent developments.
The original publication date for this article was 21/10/2009.
