Australia: Saying hello, waiving goodbye (to privilege)

All information that a lawyer receives from their client is considered to be 'confidential'. Some of that information is also considered 'privileged'. The principle of 'legal professional privilege' (also known as 'client legal privilege') is a fundamental principle of Australia's common law legal system and protects certain communications between a lawyer and their client from compulsory disclosure. To establish that legal professional privilege exists, the information or communication must:

  • pass between the client and the lawyer;
  • be for the dominant purpose of obtaining legal advice or for use in existing or anticipated litigation; and
  • be confidential.

The rationale behind legal professional privilege is that the law should encourage parties to disclose all relevant information to their lawyers. That puts the lawyer in the best possible position to sift through all of the facts and present a relevant, truthful account of the client's case to the court. Although legal professional privilege creates protection for clients, it is a mechanism which is aimed at upholding the administration of justice.

Waiver of privilege

In some circumstances, the legal professional privilege which exists in a document may be 'waived', and the protection which the privilege affords to clients can be lost. For example, where legal advice is deliberately disclosed to another party (thereby eroding confidentiality in the document) any legal professional privilege in that document will automatically be lost. This is known as 'express' waiver. However, sometimes waiver of privilege will occur where the privilege-holder acts in a manner inconsistent with the privilege, thereby 'impliedly' waiving privilege. 1 When asked to determine if privilege has been impliedly waived, courts will consider broader notions of fairness, including whether it is unfair or misleading for a person to rely on legal professional privilege in circumstances where they have acted inconsistently with the privilege.2

What then, amounts to conduct which is 'inconsistent' with the maintenance of legal professional privilege? A simple example is where a party expressly states that they have relied on advice from their lawyers in making a decision or taking a particular action. By expressly referring to the legal advice (or the substance or gist of it) as justification or explanation for their conduct, a court is likely to form the view that it is not permissible for the client to simultaneously withhold the advice from disclosure. For example, privilege was taken to be waived in a statement released to the market by a company which read, 'The Board's lawyers have been instructed to vigorously defend the claim and have advised that the plaintiffs' claim will not succeed''.3 Further, during the course of a commercial dispute, where a party indicated that it had received 'legal advice supporting this position', privilege was determined to have been impliedly waived.4

A lesson in waiver: Sanrus Pty Ltd & Ors v Monto Coal 2 Pty Ltd [2019] QSC 144

The recent decision of the Supreme Court of Queensland in Sanrus Pty Ltd & Ors v Monto Coal 2 Pty Ltd5has highlighted a number of other ways in which legal professional privilege can potentially be waived and serves as a timely reminder for clients and lawyers alike. The judgement of Flanagan J (which was delivered during the trial of the substantive dispute between the parties) answered three main questions, all relating to the issue of wavier of legal professional privilege.

First Question – was privilege waived by the defence filed by the defendants?

In answering the First Question, Flanagan J was required to consider the substantive dispute between the parties. In summary, the parties had fallen into dispute in respect of each of their obligations to develop a mining project. Pursuant to clause 5.1 of their joint venture agreement, both parties had agreed to:

'use all reasonable efforts to obtain the grant of the Mining Lease and to, having regard to all relevant factors relating to the [Project] and the economic viability of the [Project], develop Stage 1'

The plaintiffs alleged that the above clause in the joint venture agreement required the defendants in the proceeding (Monto Coal) to use all reasonable steps to develop the first stage of the mining project. Monto Coal, on the other hand, refuted the plaintiffs' interpretation of clause 5.1 and further alleged that the parties shared a 'common assumption' regarding the progress of the project and therefore until the project was economically viable, there was no obligation on either party to proceed with the project. This 'common assumption' was expressly pleaded in the defence which had been filed by the defendants.

The Plaintiffs argued that the defendants, by framing their defence in such a way, had put into issue the state of mind and subjective beliefs of officers of Monto Coal (who held the 'common assumption'). The plaintiffs further argued that this state of mind was likely to have been informed by legal advice received by Monto Coal. On this basis, the Plaintiffs said that defendants had impliedly waived the content of the legal advice which was likely to have contributed to the state of mind of the officers of Monto Coal. The plaintiffs sought production of the legal advice and an opportunity to cross-examine the defendants on the content of that legal advice.

In the course of his judgment, Flanagan J undertook a detailed review of the case law in respect of implied waiver based on allegations made in pleadings and found that on the proper construction of the pleadings, the defendants had not pleaded their case in a manner which revealed that the state of mind held by the officers of Monto Coal was likely to have been informed by legal advice.6 Flanagan J noted that there was nothing in the defence which made an assertion as to the content of legal advice received by the defendants.7 Importantly, His Honour also found that even if there was an objective likelihood that the state of mind pleaded by the defendants could have been informed by any legal advice received, mere likelihood was insufficient to result in an implied waiver of privilege. In this regard, His Honour somewhat resolved an apparent inconsistency in Australian case law on this issue.

Second Question – can inadvertent disclosure waive privilege?

The second question which Flanagan J was required to answer was whether the inadvertent or accidental disclosure of legal advice could amount to a waiver of privilege. In particular, the plaintiffs referred to an instance where the defendants inadvertently failed to object to the tender of documents at trial which contained material which was subject to legal professional privilege.

Ordinarily, where a party accidentally discloses a privileged document to another party, courts will permit the correction of that mistake and order the return of the document.8 The plaintiffs argued that privilege in the document had been waived by the defendants failing to object to its tender and that it would be 'unfair' for that error to now simply be undone by an order of the court. On that basis, the plaintiffs argued that the entire document should be subject to examination by the parties.

In refusing to accept that the inadvertent failure of the defendants amounted to a waiver of legal professional privilege, Flanagan J referred to the following contextual factors:

  • the defendants had acted promptly upon first becoming aware of the inadvertent disclosure9;
  • a number of duplicate or near-duplicate versions of the document (which were redacted to remove privileged material) had already been tendered into evidence;
  • the conduct of the defendants 'should be viewed in the context of what is a large commercial case involving voluminous documents'10
  • the tender of the privileged documents occurred in the context of a bulk tender of documents;
  • the privileged documents had not yet been specifically referred to in the proceeding;
  • the trial judge who received the tendered documents was capable of 'put[ing] any knowledge gained from inadvertent disclosure to one side'11; and
  • it was otherwise not 'unfair' to allow the error of the defendants to be corrected.

Although not referenced in the judgment of Flanagan J, it is also relevant to note that under the Australian Solicitor Conduct Rules, lawyers are under a strict ethical obligation to notify an opposing lawyer that confidential material (including privileged material) has been inadvertently disclosed to them and arrange for the deletion or destruction of such material.12

Third Question – waiver in part, waiver in whole?

The final question that Flanagan was required to answer was whether, in disclosing part of a privileged file note to the plaintiff, the defendants had waived privilege in the entire document. Using the test described above, it is arguably unfair and inconsistent to essentially 'cherry pick' parts of a privileged document without disclosing the entirety of a document. As a starting point, Flanagan J referred to a number of authorities in Australia which have held that fairness usually requires that disclosure of a privileged document requires that the entire document be disclosed to ensure that the other party 'is not misled by an inaccurate perception of the disclosed communication'.13

However, upon review of the documents, Flanagan J concluded that the redacted parts of the document would not cause the plaintiffs to form an inaccurate perception of the unredacted parts. In other words, the plaintiffs were able to fully understand the document without having regard to the privileged material which had been redacted by the defendants. On that basis, Flanagan saw no reason to compel production of an unredacted version of the entire document.

Key Takeaways

Although the decision in Sanrus Pty Ltd & Ors v Monto Coal 2 Pty Ltd does not raise any new points of law, it serves as a timely reminder of the fundamental principles relating to waiver of legal professional privilege (both express and implied) and highlights the different ways that privilege can be lost, either through deliberate or inadvertent acts.

In his judgment, Flanagan J highlights the need for careful pleading, especially in cases where the subjective beliefs of parties (which may relate to legal rights and obligations) are likely to be an issue as between the parties.

Further, the decision reinforces the utmost care and attention which must be taken when providing documents to opposing litigants through compulsory processes such as disclosure, as well during the tendering of evidence at trial.

Whilst caution should always be taken when referring to legal advice or matters which may relate to legal advice, the decision in Sanrus confirms the position that when determining if privilege has been waived, courts will ultimately look to whether an inconsistency arises between the conduct of a privilege-holder and the maintenance of the privilege itself.


1 Mann v Carnell (1999) 201 CLR 1.

2 Osland v Secretary to Department of Justice (2008) 234 CLR 275.

3 Switchcorp Pty Ltd v Multimedia Ltd [2005] VSC 425.

4 Ampolex Ltd v Perpetual Trustee Co (Canberra) Ltd (1996) 40 NSWLR 12.

5 [2019] QSC 144.

6 Ibid at [47].

7 Ibid at [57].

8 Expense Reduction v Armstrong (2013) 250 CLR 303 at 319.

9 Ibid.

10 [2019] QSC 144 at [76].

11 Ibid at [80].

12 Rule 31, Australian Solicitor Conduct Rules 2012.

13 Attorney-General (NT) v Maurice (1986) 161 CLR 475.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions