This site uses cookies.

Does, and should, Legal Professional Privilege apply to PI Paralegal Lawyers? - Amanda Hamilton & Jane Robson, NALP

24/02/20. I was asked an interesting question this week: Are Paralegals covered by Legal Professional Privilege? Those PI paralegals who work for solicitors and barristers are covered under their employer’s umbrella, but what about those who work as independent legal advisers? Where do they fall?

The growth of paralegals

Under the Legal Services Act 2007, provision of legal advice is no longer a Reserved Activity – i.e. one that can only be undertaken by an ‘authorised’ person or body, such as solicitor, barrister, legal executive or actuary, etc. Couple that with the virtual removal of the availability of legal aid, there has been a massive surge of Professional Paralegals in the industry providing legal advice directly to clients. Many courts and judges are allowing paralegals who are members of a professional membership body, such as NALP, to represent their clients in court, but even this doesn’t necessarily mean that they are afforded the rights of Legal Professional Privilege.

The importance of Legal Professional Privilege

Legal Professional Privilege is seen as a fundamental right under the law, not just in England and Wales, but in the rest of the UK and even in the USA. It has been part of Common Law in the UK for over 400 years and is even enshrined under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights which, whilst protecting the right to keep all correspondence between individuals confidential, goes further to strengthen these rights when it comes to any exchange of information or correspondence between a lawyer and their client.

In a Factsheet published by the European Court of Human Rights in January 2019, it was explained that this additional protection was justified by “the fact that lawyers are assigned a fundamental role in a democratic society, that of defending litigants. Yet lawyers cannot carry out this essential task if they are unable to guarantee to those they are defending that their exchanges will remain confidential.” We must also remember that it is a right of the client, not of the lawyer, with only the client having the right to waive Legal Professional Privilege.

Should it apply to paralegals?

The term ‘lawyer’ is defined as “one who practises or studies law” so it is not restricted just to solicitors and barristers but covers the whole gambit of legal professionals, including Paralegals. So, if this privilege is a Human Right, and a Paralegal is, by definition, a lawyer, why is it not clear that Privilege extends to the relationship between a client and their lawyer if that lawyer is a Paralegal?

The Legal Services Act 2007 (section 190) states that, where a person (P) is not a solicitor or barrister but “provides advocacy services as an authorised person in relation to the exercise of rights of audience” then “Any communication, document, material or information relating to the provision of the services in question is privileged from disclosure in like manner as if P had at all material times been acting as P's client's solicitor.”

Since some PI Paralegals may be providing advocacy services to their clients they will have a right of audience in certain courts and tribunals. It would then follow that a client who chooses a Paralegal to provide such representation, should be able to enjoy Legal Professional Privilege, wherever it may be applicable in those scenarios.

This being the case, it should logically follow that if a Judge in a higher court has accepted an application for a PI Paralegal to advocate on behalf of their clients, any exchange between that Paralegal and their client should also be covered by Legal Professional Privilege.

We also need to look at the fact that there are some Paralegals who are authorised to instruct barristers directly or even those who are Police Station Accredited. Surely those attended by such Paralegals should be able to rely on being covered by Legal Professional Privilege in such circumstances?

Is it applied?

Whilst one would like to think that most Judges would look at a circumstance on its individual merit, this is no guarantee that Legal Professional Privilege would be granted. From what we have been able to find, it would appear that the subject simply has not been raised in a situation whereby it has gained sufficient publicity for the legal sector really to take note. This may mean that courts are routinely allowing the rights of privilege but, without it being tested, we are not going to know for sure.

The legal sector has changed significantly in recent years, with the role of the Professional Paralegal Lawyer coming more and more into its own. With this in mind, perhaps it is also time that we cleared up the grey areas on such fundamental issues as the application of Legal Professional Privilege.

By Amanda Hamilton, CEO of NALP, and Jane Robson, Director of compliance and regulation at NALP

ABOUT THE AUTHORS


Amanda Hamilton is Chief Executive, and Jane Robson is Director of compliance and regulation at the National Association of Licenced Paralegals (NALP), a non-profit Membership Body and the only Paralegal body that is recognised as an awarding organisation by Ofqual (the regulator of qualifications in England). Through its training arm, NALP Training, trading as National Paralegal College, accredited recognised professional paralegal qualifications are offered for a career as a paralegal professional.

See: http://www.nationalparalegals.co.uk and https://www.nalptraining.co.uk/

Twitter: @NALP_UK

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/NationalAssocationsofLicensedParalegals/

LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/amanda-hamilton-llb-hons-840a6a16/

Image ©iStockphoto.com/Cogent-Marketing

All information on this site was believed to be correct by the relevant authors at the time of writing. All content is for information purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. No liability is accepted by either the publisher or the author(s) for any errors or omissions (whether negligent or not) that it may contain. 

The opinions expressed in the articles are the authors' own, not those of Law Brief Publishing Ltd, and are not necessarily commensurate with general legal or medico-legal expert consensus of opinion and/or literature. Any medical content is not exhaustive but at a level for the non-medical reader to understand. 

Professional advice should always be obtained before applying any information to particular circumstances.

Excerpts from judgments and statutes are Crown copyright. Any Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of OPSI and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland under the Open Government Licence.