Adanguidi v The King [2023] NSWCCA 91
The Court found the 65-page document was created by Mr Adanguidi for the dominant purpose of seeking legal advice from his then-solicitor and thus attracted legal professional privilege; privilege was not waived because Mr Adanguidi believed the document had been destroyed and did not consent to its use or disclosure.
- Parties
- Appellant: Crespin Adanguidi; Respondent: Rex
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 20 April 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Procedural Rulings / Application for Access to Document (legal Professional Privilege)
- Outcome
- Crown application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Legal Professional Privilege, Client Legal Privilege, Waiver of Privilege, Access to Confidential Documents
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Crespin Adanguidi
Appellant
Rex
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Procedural Rulings / Application for Access to Document (legal Professional Privilege)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 65-page document in psychology file attracts legal professional privilege
- 2 Whether privilege has been waived (expressly or impliedly)
Ratio Decidendi
The Court found the 65-page document was created by Mr Adanguidi for the dominant purpose of seeking legal advice from his then-solicitor and thus attracted legal professional privilege; privilege was not waived because Mr Adanguidi believed the document had been destroyed and did not consent to its use or disclosure.
Court Disposition
Crown application dismissed
Orders
- The Crown application dated 23 March 2023 is dismissed.
- The 65-page document in Mr Adanguidi's handwriting, undated, found in his Corrective Services NSW psychology file is a confidential communication attracting legal professional privilege and is not to be produced to the Crown.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment