What happens if a judge tries to force a solicitor to reveal information about a client?
When a person facing criminal proceedings disappears or remains abroad, investigators and the court will naturally want to find them. There has always been a clear rule that what is said between client and solicitor is as confidential as anything said between a patient and doctor. Therefore, it was no doubt a surprise to one solicitor at a firm called Bark Solicitors when HHJ Lockhart KC demanded the solicitor reveal information about her client’s whereabouts and found herself criticised by the judge for failing to do so.
Mr Justice Bennathan, sitting at the High Court in London, considered where the boundary fell between legitimate enquires by judges and solicitor-client confidentiality in a case called R (Bark Solicitors Company Ltd) v Worcester Crown Court [2026] EWHC 2026 (Admin). Mr Justice Bennathan quashed Judge Lockhart’s order requiring the solicitor’s firm to disclose contact information connected with a client who had absconded. The judgment is an important reminder that legal professional privilege is not a favour which a court may set aside because a case is serious or a defendant’s conduct is frustrating. It protects the justice system itself.
What happened in the Bark Solicitors case?
The client faced an allegation of conspiracy to import a very large quantity of cocaine. He was outside the country and his trial was approaching. The Crown Court ordered his solicitors to disclose a wide range of information, including telephone numbers, email addresses, IP addresses and a suspected physical address.
When it became clear that the client would not return for trial, the solicitor correctly sought professional advice on the situation, asked for the client’s consent to disclose information and then informed both the prosecution and the court of the position within two days of discovering it. Judge Lockhart made comments critical of the solicitor suggesting her conduct had facilitated him in absconding and remarking that such solicitors bring the legal profession into disrepute. The High Court looked at what had happened and described the solicitors actions as entirely proper going on to say that Judge Lockhart’s comments were entirely unjustified.
The Crown Court had concluded that the information was not protected by legal professional privilege and relied on its statutory powers and the Criminal Procedure Rules. On judicial review, the High Court disagreed and quashed the disclosure order confirming that solicitors must not disclose information given to them in confidence.
It is worth saying that legal privilege belongs to the client and a solicitor cannot choose to waive it.
Why can contact details be legally privileged?
Legal professional privilege protects confidential communications between a client and a lawyer made for the purpose of giving or receiving legal advice. In criminal proceedings, it allows a defendant to speak candidly with the solicitor responsible for protecting their rights and preparing their case.
The significant point in Bark Solicitors was that a telephone number or email address can be more than an item in an address book. While proceedings are active, it may be the very channel through which privileged legal advice is requested and delivered. If a lawyer can be compelled to reveal that channel, the client is likely to stop using it. Their practical ability to obtain confidential advice would then be undermined.
The court drew a distinction between current contact routes and historic information. Older records which no longer provide a live route for legal advice may fall to be considered differently. In other words, the decision does not create a permanent shield around every address or telephone number a client has ever used.
Privilege and confidentiality are related, but different
Solicitors also owe a professional duty of confidentiality. That duty is broad: it covers information acquired through the solicitor-client relationship and continues after the retainer ends. There are circumstances in which confidential information may lawfully have to be disclosed, including where legislation or a valid court order requires it.
Legal professional privilege is stronger and more specific. Once it applies, the leading authorities treat it as a fundamental right rather than a matter to be balanced against the apparent usefulness of the information. A court cannot remove it simply by relying on general case-management powers or procedural rules. The client may waive privilege, but the solicitor cannot do so on the client’s behalf without authority.
That distinction matters. A solicitor faced with a demand for information must identify what information is held, why it is held, whether it is confidential, whether privilege attaches to it and whether any recognised exception or waiver applies. A rushed answer can prejudice the client; an unjustified refusal can also have serious consequences. The issue needs careful legal analysis.
Does the decision help a person evade arrest?
No. The judgment does not give a defendant a right to hide, and it does not stop the police from using lawful investigative powers. A warrant remains enforceable. Investigators may obtain information from other sources where the relevant legal requirements are met. A person who fails to attend court may face arrest, remand, separate criminal liability and a much more difficult position when bail or sentence is considered.
Nor does the decision say that a solicitor may help a client to commit an offence. Communications made to further crime or fraud do not attract legal professional privilege. The precise limits of that exception are fact-sensitive, but ordinary advice about the allegation, the proceedings, surrender or representation is not converted into criminal assistance merely because the client is wanted.
What the case of Bark Solicitors protects is the person’s ability to obtain independent legal advice, including advice they may urgently need about returning to the jurisdiction, responding to a warrant and participating in the case.
The constitutional role of the defence solicitor
The High Court also addressed criticism directed at the solicitors. It rejected any suggestion that the firm had facilitated or covered up the client’s absence. Defence lawyers do not become agents of the prosecution or the court simply because they act for somebody accused of a serious offence.
That independence is essential. A solicitor must comply with the law and duties owed to the court but must also protect the client’s confidential and privileged information. If lawyers are publicly criticised for asserting privilege in good faith, other defendants may hesitate to seek advice and other solicitors may feel pressured to disclose information without proper scrutiny.
The court’s message was clear: the constitutional role of defence lawyers deserves protection from unjustified criticism. Robust representation is part of a fair system, not an obstacle to it.
Could a court ever order disclosure of a client’s whereabouts?
The answer depends on exactly what is sought and why. Bark Solicitors concerned live communications information during continuing criminal proceedings. It does not establish that a client’s location is privileged in every setting.
Relevant questions for future courts are likely to include whether:
- the information would reveal a current channel for privileged advice;
- it is an old administrative record with no continuing legal-advice function;
- the communication was made for the purpose of legal advice; and
- a specific statutory power, rather than a general procedural power, applies.
Even then, the label placed on the request is not decisive. The court should look at the substance and practical effect of disclosure.
What should a defendant do if they are abroad or have missed court?
Ignoring the position tends to make it worse – I once saw a judge remark to the solicitor of a defendant who had chosen to go on holiday to Spain rather than attend court, “I hope he enjoys the Cerveza”, the strong implication being that she intended to send him to prison upon his return! A defendant should obtain advice from a criminal defence solicitor as soon as possible after a date has been missed. The solicitor can check the status of the case, identify any warrant, advise on surrender and bail, communicate with the court or prosecution, and begin preserving the evidence needed for the defence. We were contacted by a man who had fled the UK around a decade before contacting us. There was still a warrant for his arrest in force. We were able to arrange for him to surrender to British authorities in Gibraltar and be returned to the UK where the old case was revived and the prosecution promptly offered no evidence.
How Chetwode Criminal Defence Solicitors can help
Chetwode Criminal Defence Solicitors advises clients in serious and sensitive criminal cases, including cases involving warrants, overseas defendants and urgent court hearings. We can explain what information is protected, what must be disclosed and how to engage with the criminal process without giving up important rights.
If you are facing criminal proceedings and are unsure what to do next, early advice can turn an uncertain position into a practical plan. Contact Chetwode Criminal Defence Solicitors to discuss the allegation and the immediate steps required.