Z v New South Wales Crime Commission

Z v New South Wales Crime Commission. Practice and procedure – Legal professional privilege – Solicitor summonsed to give evidence before the New South Wales Crime Commission ("the Commission") – Whether the communication of a client's name or the communication of the client's contact details was a privileged communication.

Legal practitioners – Solicitor and client – Legal professional privilege –Whether the communication of a client's name or the communication of the client's contact details was a privileged communication.

Statutes – Interpretation – New South Wales Crime Commission Act 1985 (NSW) ("the Act") – Section 18B(4) of the Act – Entitlement of legal practitioner appearing as a witness before the Commission to refuse to answer a question if the answer would disclose a privileged communication – Whether disclosing a client's name and address would disclose a privileged communication.

Statutes – Interpretation – Section 18B(4) of the Act – Entitlement of legal practitioner appearing as a witness before the Commission to refuse to answer a question if the answer would disclose a privileged communication – Whether s 18B(4) of the Act qualifies this entitlement by providing that the legal practitioner must, if required, "furnish to the Commission the name and address of the person to whom or by whom the communication was made".

Words and phrases – "confidential communication", "dominant purpose", "legal professional privilege", "privileged communication".

New South Wales Crime Commission Act 1985 (NSW) – ss 3, 5, 6(1), 13(1), 13(8), 18(2), 18B(1), 18B(4).