High Court of Australia
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
GLEESON CJ,
KIRBY, HAYNE, CALLINAN AND CRENNAN JJ
Z APPELLANT
AND
NEW SOUTH WALES CRIME COMMISSION RESPONDENT
Z v New South Wales Crime Commission [2007] HCA 7
28 February 2007
S229/2006
ORDER
Appeal dismissed with costs.
On appeal from the Supreme Court of New South Wales
Representation
D F Jackson QC with B A Arste for the appellant (instructed by Bolzan & Dimitri)
M G Sexton SC, Solicitor-General for the State of New South Wales with P F Singleton and M T England for the respondent (instructed by New South Wales Crime Commission)
Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.
CATCHWORDS
Z v New South Wales Crime Commission
Practice and procedure – Legal professional privilege – Solicitor summonsed to give evidence before the New South Wales Crime Commission ("the Commission") – Whether the communication of a client's name or the communication of the client's contact details was a privileged communication.
Legal practitioners – Solicitor and client – Legal professional privilege –Whether the communication of a client's name or the communication of the client's contact details was a privileged communication.
Statutes – Interpretation – New South Wales Crime Commission Act 1985 (NSW) ("the Act") – Section 18B(4) of the Act – Entitlement of legal practitioner appearing as a witness before the Commission to refuse to answer a question if the answer would disclose a privileged communication – Whether disclosing a client's name and address would disclose a privileged communication.
Statutes – Interpretation – Section 18B(4) of the Act – Entitlement of legal practitioner appearing as a witness before the Commission to refuse to answer a question if the answer would disclose a privileged communication – Whether s 18B(4) of the Act qualifies this entitlement by providing that the legal practitioner must, if required, "furnish to the Commission the name and address of the person to whom or by whom the communication was made".
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate