Regina v Seaton [2010] EWCA Crim 1980; [2010] WLR (D) 234

“Where it was suggested at trial that a defendant’s or witness’s account was a recent fabrication, he could not, unless he had waived legal professional privilege, be asked whether he had told his lawyer what he now said was the truth, or whether he was willing to waive the privilege. If a defendant gave evidence of what had passed between him and his lawyer, he could not be in breach of his own privilege, but was waiving privilege, although not necessarily waiving it entirely and generally. If a defendant said that he had given his solicitor the account then offered at trial, that would ordinarily mean that he could not be cross-examined about exactly what he had told the solicitor on that topic, but another party could comment upon the fact that the solicitor had not been called to confirm something which, if true, he easily could confirm, if the comment were fair.”

WLR Daily, 20th August 2010

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.