Search results
1 – 1 of 1
The purpose of this paper is to assess the balance between anti-money laundering reporting obligations and the doctrine of advocate–client confidentiality for legal practitioners.
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to assess the balance between anti-money laundering reporting obligations and the doctrine of advocate–client confidentiality for legal practitioners.
Design/methodology/approach
The methodology adopted for this research is secondary research and analysis.
Findings
The doctrine of confidentiality between advocates and clients and reporting obligations under the anti-money laundering regime are relevant issues today more than ever. The equitable doctrine of confidentiality seeks to protect confidential information provided by one party to another in circumstances that import an obligation not to disclose that information or to use it for unauthorised purposes. The Constitution guarantees fair trial. Money laundering is a menace that should be fought from all fronts. Self-regulation is the best bet to address money laundering for legal practitioners.
Originality/value
This paper is the work of the author and has not been submitted for publication elsewhere.
Details