The ability of a prosecuting authority to
require waiver of privilege, and the circumstances in which it will be taken to have done so, therefore remains in some doubt and would appear to vary depending on the particular rules and guidelines applicable to the prosecuting authority.
Since the decision in R v. George, the OFT guidance «Applications for leniency and no - action in cartel cases» (the 2013 Leniency Guidance), now adopted by the CMA, has changed and no longer
requires waiver of privilege as an element of co-operation.
But that's not all the Bar thinks would be
required in some (unidentified) circumstances: «Depending on the sensitivity
of the matter, Attorney may need to avoid using the public wireless connection entirely or notify Client
of possible risks attendant to his use
of the public wireless connection, including potential disclosure
of confidential information and possible
waiver of attorney - client
privilege or work product protections, and seek her informed consent to do so.»