Jacobs v R [2013] NSWSC 633

The three confidential exhibits (CK1, CK2, CK3) are confidential communications made for the dominant purpose of providing legal advice, signed off by an Australian lawyer as required under the Evidence Act 1995 s 117 and s 118. The documents are protected by legal professional privilege and the Commissioner is excused from producing them.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 23 May 2013
Procedural Posture: Interlocutory Application / Application by Commissioner of Police to Be Excused From Producing Confidential Documents
Outcome: Commissioner of Police excused from producing confidential documents identified as Confidential Exhibits CK1, CK2 and CK3.
Legal Topics: ['client Legal Privilege' 'production of Documents' 'police Legal Advice' 'confidential Communications']

['evidence Law' 'criminal Law'] ['client Legal Privilege' 'production of Documents' 'police Legal Advice' 'confidential Communications']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Application by Commissioner of Police to Be Excused From Producing Confidential Documents

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether the Commissioner of Police should be excused from producing confidential documents (CK1, CK2, CK3) on grounds of client legal privilege' 'Whether communications are protected as legal advice under Evidence Act 1995 s 118' 'Whether s 119 of the Evidence Act 1995 applies in these circumstances']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Commissioner of Police excused from producing confidential documents identified as Confidential Exhibits CK1, CK2 and CK3.

Orders

['The Commissioner of Police is excused from producing confidential documents identified as Confidential Exhibits CK1, CK2 and CK3.']