view
Abstract: The ability to assert legal professional privilege is recognised in English law as a fundamental human right. In the United States, attorney– client privilege is one of the most sacrosanct privileges. The use of deferred prosecution agreements (DPAs) in the United States and England and part that corporate cooperation plays raise the concern that if cooperation requires waiver of privilege, privilege is effectively otiose in this context. In the United States, DPAs rekindle evidential and procedural issues of selective waiver and judicial oversight. We contrast the role of the English courts in providing judicial oversight of DPAs with the more limited degree of judicial involvement in the United States. We analyse the intersection of privilege and DPAs, evaluating the requirements for cooperation with the prosecutor and the impact on the entity’s ability to assert privilege. We consider whether waiver of privilege forms an essential constituent of cooperation and the possibility and consequences of limited/selective waiver. The optimum position is that waiver should not be perceived as a prerequisite to cooperation for the purpose of obtaining a DPA. The US approach to the relationship between cooperation and waiver of privilege comes closer to the optimum position than does the English approach. In contrast, active judicial oversight in England is preferable to the more limited exercise in the United States, and the availability of limited waiver in England provides a degree of protection to the corporation that corporations lack when waiving privilege or considering whether to do so.
Keywords: deferred prosecution agreements; legal professional privilege; attorney–client privilege; waiver of privilege; limited waiver; Upjohn warnings; judicial oversight
JICL welcomes full length articles (generally not exceeding 13,000 words inclusive of footnotes), shorter contributions in the form of notes and comments (generally not exceeding 8,000 words inclusive of footnotes) and book review articles of not more than 6,000 words.
We accept contributions for consideration on an exclusive submission basis. When submitting an article please certify that it is an unpublished article (that is, it has not been previously published in substantially similar form or with substantially similar content) and that it is not under consideration by any other journal.
To facilitate anonymous review, please give the names of authors and their short biographical information and acknowledgments in a separate page.
Authors retain copyright in the words used, but upon submission of material for publication, grant Sweet & Maxwell a licence to publish the submission in print and/or digital formats. Sweet & Maxwell retains copyright in the design, format and layout of all material published in JICL.
Once submissions are published, authors are entitled to one copy of the issue, 10 offprint copies and a PDF version of the submission.
Authors who send articles published in JICL to other publishers or media must include a reference to the publication of the article by JICL and Sweet & Maxwell.
Contributions and book reviews should be submitted in Microsoft Word format by way of email attachment to Professor Anton Cooray at Anton.cooray.1@city.ac.uk.
Authors should follow the OSCOLA citation system (http://www.law.ox.ac.uk/publications/oscola.php), except that we prefer authors to use indenting sparingly.
JICL uses the following heading levels: Main headings are in bold and preceded by a Roman numeral; second-level headings are in bold and italics and preceded by an uppercase alphabet; third-level headings are preceded by an Arabic numeral; and fourth-level headings are in italics and preceded by a lowercase alphabet.