Certified Legal Professional (CLP) Practice Exam

How does sharing a message with a VP about contract negotiations affect its privileged status?

1. It remains privileged as long as it refers to legal advice

2. It does not remain privileged because non-legal personnel are involved

3. It is deemed privileged until issues arise

4. It is not privileged due to the nature of business communication

The correct answer is: It does not remain privileged because non-legal personnel are involved

The correct understanding regarding the privileged status of a communication involving a Vice President (VP) during contract negotiations centers on the concept of attorney-client privilege and its limitations. When a message includes a VP or any non-legal personnel in the communication, it can compromise the privileged status of that message. The primary function of attorney-client privilege is to protect disclosure of communications between a lawyer and their client intended for legal advice. The privilege is designed to encourage open and honest communication between attorneys and their clients. However, when communications involve non-legal personnel who are not a part of the legal team, it can lead to a waiver of privilege due to the presence of those unfamiliar with the legal process. In this case, because the VP is a non-legal individual, their involvement in the communication implies that the message may no longer be confidential in the way the privilege requires. The rationale is that once the communication is shared with someone outside the attorney-client relationship, the expectation of confidentiality might be lost, thereby impacting the message's protected status. Therefore, the key takeaway is that once non-legal personnel participate in a discussion intended to seek or provide legal advice, the privileged nature of that communication may no longer be upheld. This underscores the importance of maintaining confidentiality in