# Legal professional privilege

> **Key takeaway:** Advice privilege: lawyer–client legal advice (Three Rivers No 6). Litigation privilege: dominant purpose of litigation in prospect (Waugh). Absolute subject to waiver/iniquity. Multi-addressee care (Jet2). Client owns privilege.

- **Jurisdiction:** England & Wales
- **Practice area:** Civil Procedure
- **Last reviewed:** 2026-08-04
- **Interactive page:** https://kttclegal.info/library/notes/CivilProcedure/legal-professional-privilege
- **Keywords:** legal professional privilege, legal advice privilege, litigation privilege, Three Rivers, dominant purpose, waiver, Jet2, disclosure

## What is this about?

Legal professional privilege protects confidential communications from compelled disclosure. English law recognises legal advice privilege and litigation privilege, with strict conditions. Waiver and crime-fraud exceptions are the main pressure points.

## What is the core rule?

Legal advice privilege covers confidential communications between lawyer and client for the dominant purpose of giving or receiving legal advice (Three Rivers (No 6)). Litigation privilege covers confidential communications between client/lawyer and third parties where the dominant purpose is litigation that is reasonably in prospect (Waugh; Three Rivers). Privilege is absolute where established, subject to waiver and the iniquity exception. In-house lawyers may attract privilege when acting qua lawyer; multi-addressee emails need careful analysis (Civil Aviation Authority v Jet2).

## What are the elements or test?

1. Advice privilege or litigation privilege?
2. Confidentiality maintained?
3. Dominant purpose test satisfied?
4. Who is the 'client' for advice privilege in a corporate setting?
5. Waiver (express/collateral) or iniquity exception?
6. Part 31/PD57AD listing and redaction practice

## Which authorities matter?

- **Three Rivers District Council v Bank of England (No 6) [2004] UKHL 48, [2005] 1 AC 610** — House of Lords on the scope of legal advice privilege.
- **Waugh v British Railways Board [1980] AC 521** — Dominant purpose test for litigation privilege.
- **Civil Aviation Authority v Jet2.com Ltd [2020] EWCA Civ 35, [2020] QB 1027** — Court of Appeal guidance on multi-addressee communications and dominant purpose.
- **R v Derby Magistrates' Court, ex p B [1996] AC 487** — Classic affirmation of the strength of legal professional privilege.

## How does this apply in practice?

Privilege belongs to the client. Careless onward disclosure can waive. Regulatory investigations may raise distinct statutory gateways. Pair with disclosure notes.

## What are common pitfalls?

- Labelling documents 'privileged' without dominant purpose
- Assuming all in-house counsel emails are privileged
- Copying third parties and destroying confidentiality
- Partial deployment waiver surprises

## When would a practitioner use this?

Disclosure reviews, investigation reports, and board legal advice handling.

## Quick reference

Advice privilege: lawyer–client legal advice (Three Rivers No 6). Litigation privilege: dominant purpose of litigation in prospect (Waugh). Absolute subject to waiver/iniquity. Multi-addressee care (Jet2). Client owns privilege.

---

*Reference material from [KTTC Legal](https://kttclegal.info/), not legal advice. Work product supports instructing solicitors and barristers under their supervision. England & Wales.*