Paragraph (b)(7) recognizes that lawyers from different law firms may need to disclose limited information to each other in order to identify and resolve conflicts of interest, such as when a lawyer is considering working with another firm, two or more firms are considering a merger, or a lawyer is considering purchasing a law firm. See Rule 1.17, footnote . In these circumstances, lawyers and law firms may disclose limited information, but only after substantive discussions about the new relationship have taken place. Such disclosure should normally include only the identity of the persons and entities involved in a case, a brief summary of the general issues involved and information as to whether the case has been closed. However, even this limited information should only be disclosed to the extent reasonably necessary to identify and resolve conflicts of interest that may arise from the potential new relationship. In addition, disclosure of information is prohibited if it would affect solicitor-client privilege or client privilege (e.g., a client business seeking advice on a business acquisition that has not been publicly announced; a person consulted a lawyer about the possibility of divorce before the person`s intentions became known to his or her spouse; or a person consulted with a lawyer about a consulted a criminal investigation that did not result in a public indictment). In such circumstances, paragraph (a) prohibits disclosure unless the client or former client gives informed consent. A lawyer`s fiduciary duty to the lawyer`s office may also determine a lawyer`s conduct when exploring a relationship with another law firm and is beyond the scope of these rules. One of these rights is solicitor-client privilege. It is a privilege that belongs to the client (not the lawyer) in a client-lawyer relationship. It does not apply to consultants who are not legally qualified.  Therefore, only the customer can do without it. In the law of England and Wales, solicitor-client privilege is divided into two types: advisory privilege and litigation privilege, the former being more absolute and defined more broadly than the latter.
The Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) and identical provisions of the Evidence Act 1995 in New South Wales and Tasmania now govern cases where privilege prevents the presentation of evidence in the course of court proceedings (as defined by proceedings bound by the Evidence Acts). New South Wales court decisions expand the definitions of the Evidence Act to include the discovery and inspection of documents. The right has been renamed by law to reflect the fact that it is a customer`s right. It is now the client`s legal privilege (as opposed to solicitor-client privilege). The courts view privilege as a „general substantive principle that plays an important role in the effective and efficient administration of justice by the courts” and not as a mere rule of evidence. As such, it extends to all forms of mandatory disclosure, including search warrants.   While Parliament may limit privilege, „the law should not pave the way for the legislature to limit privilege.”  Rule 1: Send notices to your lawyer. This may be your in-house lawyer or outside legal counsel, but for solicitor-client privilege to take effect, it must be addressed to a lawyer who provides legal advice. Privilege does not protect communications between employees when no lawyer is present.
In other words, you can`t email your non-lawyer boss and mark it as „privileged and confidential,” because without a lawyer on the recipient side to provide legal analysis and advice, there is no mechanism to protect communications from legal disclosure. The Virginia State Bar Legal Ethics Committee has issued its opinion on the privacy of messages sent through websites. The committee felt that anyone sending an email from a website should not expect privacy, as it is like leaving a voicemail for a lawyer on Yellow Pages. But what is the outcome when an employee like Smith seeks guidance in her individual role, as opposed to company characteristics? Courts will grant solicitor-client privilege to officers, including in their individual capacity, provided there is clear evidence that the agent communicated with the agent`s individual counsel in private matters such as possible individual liability. Not surprisingly, the presentation required of company employees in this regard is stricter. In addition, even if the necessary evidence is provided, some information may constitute a conflict of interest for the corporate lawyer.