This browser is not actively supported anymore. For the best passle experience, we strongly recommend you upgrade your browser.
Welcome to Reed Smith's viewpoints — timely commentary from our lawyers on topics relevant to your business and wider industry. Browse to see the latest news and subscribe to receive updates on topics that matter to you, directly to your mailbox.
| 1 minute read

French constitutional court strikes down new legal privilege for in-house counsel

In a decision published this morning, the French Constitutional Court struck out the provisions introduced into the 'Justice Program Law' creating a new category of legal professional privilege attaching to certain legal advice given by in-house counsel. Currently, legal professional privilege in France only attaches to advice given by certain regulated professions (outside counsel, notaries and patent attorneys).

The Court held that the inclusion of these provisions in the law were a “legislative rider” (cavalier législatif), in breach of Article 45 of the Constitution. The Court found that this reform did not have a sufficient connection with the original purpose of the bill, which it construed narrowly.

The Court's decision does not address whether this new category of legal privilege complies with other constitutional requirements. The Members of Parliament who opposed the law argued before the Court that this new category of legal privilege would excessively restrict the powers of regulatory authorities and would obstruct the performance of their statutory duties, thereby undermining their ability to safeguard public order and prosecute offences. 

An answer to this important question will need to wait for a fresh referral to the Court, if the Government re-adopts these same provisions after following the proper parliamentary procedure (which is to be expected).

For more information, see our client alert on the original proposal, authored by Daniel KadarPeter RosherMarianne SchaffnerNatasha TardifAna AtallahBenoit CharotClément FouchardMarc LévyAndrew TetleyNicolas WalkerLucile ChneiweissVanessa Thieffry, and Amani Lakhdhar.

148. Dès lors, sans qu’il soit besoin de se prononcer sur les autres griefs et sans que le Conseil constitutionnel ne préjuge de la conformité du contenu de ces dispositions aux autres exigences constitutionnelles, il y a lieu de constater que, adopté selon une procédure contraire à la Constitution, le paragraphe IV de l’article 49 lui est donc contraire.


constitutional law, french law, legal privilege, discovery, litigation