Legal Professional Priviege in International, European and Czech Law

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F61989592%3A15220%2F19%3A73599748" target="_blank" >RIV/61989592:15220/19:73599748 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://rozkotova.cld.bz/rww/CYIL-vol-10-2019/170/" target="_blank" >https://rozkotova.cld.bz/rww/CYIL-vol-10-2019/170/</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Legal Professional Priviege in International, European and Czech Law

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

The communication between lawyers and their clients is generally perceived as deserving special protection from public authorities’ intrusion. Therefore, there are specific rules of law in numerous jurisdictions according to which certain lawyer-client communications cannot be subject to compelled disclosure in legal proceedings; the protection granted to such communication is generally known as legal professional privilege (LPP). Typically, the provisions on LPP are not enshrined in written law but stem from jurisprudence, which makes it more difficult to generalise, as the case-law is often specific for different areas of law. Thus, the extent of LPP differs among different jurisdictions. This article compares the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union and concludes that while the extent of LPP under the ECtHR’s interpretation is broader, the CJ EU nonetheless introduced specific procedures for its protection. This serves as a recommendation for the Czech Republic, which might wish to introduce the LPP protection based on the ECtHR’s approach, but guaranteed by procedures similar to those developed by the CJ EU.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Legal Professional Priviege in International, European and Czech Law

Popis výsledku anglicky

The communication between lawyers and their clients is generally perceived as deserving special protection from public authorities’ intrusion. Therefore, there are specific rules of law in numerous jurisdictions according to which certain lawyer-client communications cannot be subject to compelled disclosure in legal proceedings; the protection granted to such communication is generally known as legal professional privilege (LPP). Typically, the provisions on LPP are not enshrined in written law but stem from jurisprudence, which makes it more difficult to generalise, as the case-law is often specific for different areas of law. Thus, the extent of LPP differs among different jurisdictions. This article compares the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union and concludes that while the extent of LPP under the ECtHR’s interpretation is broader, the CJ EU nonetheless introduced specific procedures for its protection. This serves as a recommendation for the Czech Republic, which might wish to introduce the LPP protection based on the ECtHR’s approach, but guaranteed by procedures similar to those developed by the CJ EU.

Druh

J_SC - Článek v periodiku v databázi SCOPUS

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

50501 - Law

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

S - Specificky vyzkum na vysokych skolach

Rok uplatnění

2019

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Czech Yearbook of Public and Private International Law

ISSN

1805-0565

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

2019

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

1

Stát vydavatele periodika

CZ - Česká republika

Počet stran výsledku

14

Strana od-do

151-164

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85079874277