Abstract
This article addresses whether there are sufficient constraints on legal professionals acting as police informants, following the controversial ‘Lawyer X’ case. It examines key observations of the High Court of Australia in AB v CD; EF v CD [2018] HCA 58 relating to lawyers’ and barristers’ duties to their clients and to the court. It argues that existing professional rules and common law duties are insufficient to prevent legal advocates from acting as human sources. The author also suggests implications arising from the decision for the application of public interest immunity to human sources.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
