Podcast Location:
Download it here [file size: 25.3 MB]
Categories:
Criminal Law
CPD Points:
Up to 1 point. details »

Due to the difference in guidelines between the SRA and the Bar Standards Board, CPD points are awarded differently for Solicitors, Barristers and Legal Executives:

Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain 1 CPD point (60 minutes)
Listen only, gain ½ a CPD point (30 minutes)

Regulated by the Bar Standards Board:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain 1 accredited CPD point (60 minutes)

Regulated by ILEX:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain 1 CPD point (60 minutes)
Listen only, gain ½ a CPD point (30 minutes)

Cost:
  • FREE
Length:
30 minutes of audio
(+ optional 5 minute online quiz)
Plays on Computer:
Yes Downloadable as MP3:    Yes
Contributor(s):
Course Aims:

This podcast aims to give an overview of the laws surrounding Privilege and Public Interest Immunity and the occasions that evidence will be excluded as a result of these doctrines. It focuses specifically on the parts the doctrines play in criminal proceedings and therefore the podcast will be of particular use to Criminal practitioners.

Outcomes:
After completing the course you will:
  • Know the definitions of the various types of privilege that exist namely the privilege against self-incrimination, legal professional privilege and 'Without Prejudice' Correspondence;
  • Receive examples of statutory exceptions to the privilege against self-incrimination;
  • Understand the rationale behind Legal Professional Privilege;
  • Understand when Legal Professional Privilege will arise and the types of communication it applies to;
  • Understand when Legal Professional Privilege can be waived;
  • Know the exceptions surrounding the Legal Professional Privilege;
  • Understand what type of communications the 'Without Prejudice' privilege applies to and the relevant exceptions;
  • Understand the test for excluding evidence under Public Interest Immunity;
  • Know examples of when Public Interest Immunity has been requested, denied or allowed;
  • Understand the procedure relating to Public Interest Immunity.
Level:
General Interest Difficulty: 2 of 5
Classification:
Legal Principles
Practical Guide
Sources and References:
  • Bar Council Code Conduct;
  • Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984;
  • Criminal Evidence Act 1898;
  • Children Act 1989;
  • Criminal Justice Act 1987;
  • Theft Act 1968;
  • Criminal Damage Act 1971;
  • Fraud Act 2006;
  • Civil Evidence Act 1968;
  • Witness Act 1806;
  • Insolvency Act 1986;
  • C plc v P (Secretary of State for the Home Office and other intervening [2007] 3 All ER 1034;
  • R v Boyes (1861) 1 B & S 311;
  • Khan v Khan [1982] 2 All ER 60;
  • AT & T Istel v Tully [1993] AC 45 HL;
  • Rank Film Distributors Ltd v Video Information Centre [1982] AC 380;
  • Re G (A minor) [1996] 2 All ER 65;
  • A Chief Constable v A County Council [2003] 1 FLR 579 ;
  • Blunt v Park Lane Hotel Ltd [1942] 2 KB;
  • Renworth Ltd v Stephansen [1996] 3 All ER 244;
  • Brown v Scott [2001] 2 WLR 817;
  • S v Switzerland (1991) 14 EHRR 670;
  • Morgan Grenfell & Co Ltd v Special Commissioner of Income Tax [2003] 1 AC 563;
  • Three Rivers District Council v Bank of England (No 6) [2005] 1 AC 610;
  • Balabel v Air India [1988] Ch 317;
  • Nederlandse Reassuriante Groep Holding NV v Bacon & Woodrow [1995] 1 All ER 976;
  • Re Highgrade Traders Ltd [1984] BCLC 151;
  • USA v Philip Morris Inc, The Times, 16th April 2004;
  • Re L (A Minor) (Police Investigation: Privilege) [1997] AC 16;
  • GE Capital v Sutton [2004] 2 BCLC 662;
  • Expandable Ltd and others v Rubin, The Times, 10 March 2008;
  • British Coal Corp v Dennis Rye Ltd (No 2) [1988] 3 All ER 816;
  • R v Derby Magistrates' Court, ex p B [1996] AC 487 ;
  • Crescent Farm (Sidcup) Sport Ltd v Sterling Offices Ltd [1972] Ch 533;
  • Barclays Bank plc v Eustice [1995] 4 All ER 411 CA;
  • R v Snaresbrook Court ex p DPP [1988] QB 532;
  • R (Howe) v South Durham Magistrates' Court [2005] RTR 55;
  • R v Cottrill [2004] All ER (D) 287;
  • Barnetson v Framlington Group Ltd [2007] 3 All ER 1054 ;
  • Buckinghamshire CC v Moran [1990] Ch 623;
  • Rogers v Home Secretary [1973] AC 388;
  • Secretary of State for Defence v Guardian Newspapers [1985] 1 AC 339;
  • X Ltd v Morgan-Grampian (Publishers) Ltd [1991] 1 AC 1;
  • R v Horseferry Road Magistrates' Court ex p Bennet (No 2) [1994] 1 All ER 289;
  • R v Chief Constable of the West Midlands ex p Wiley [1995] 1 AC 274;
  • R v Johnson (Kenneth) (1989) 88 Cr App R 131;
  • Frankson v Home Office [2003] 1 WLR 1952;
  • Conway v Rimmer [1968] AC 910;
  • R v H, R v C [2004] 2 AC 134;
  • Burmah Oil Co v Bank of England [1980] AC 1090;
  • R v Keane [1994] 1 WLR 746 CA;
  • Klass v Federal Republic of Germany (1978) 2 EHRR 214, 232 ;
  • Rowe and Davis v United Kingdom (2000) 30 EHRR 1 R v H [2003] 1 WLR 411.

This podcast examines the doctrines of privilege and Public Interest Immunity. It discusses the legislation and case law pertaining to the doctrine of privilege, namely privilege against self-incrimination, legal professional privilege and "Without Prejudice" correspondence. It also analyses the rules surrounding Public Interest Immunity which aims to exclude evidence on the grounds of public policy.

Podcast Added: 16/12/2008

Podcast last reviewed: 2011-04-26

Start this CPDcast Activity

© CPDcast.com