Wenkart, Thomas Richard v The Commissioner, Australian Federal Police

In the Federal Court of Australia, the case of Wenkart, Thomas Richard v The Commissioner, Australian Federal Police and others (No. NG 106 of 1995) was heard by Branson J. The applicants, Thomas Richard Wenkart and Geoffrey Albert Holden, sought declarations regarding the legal professional privilege of certain documents seized during a search warrant executed by the Australian Federal Police on the offices of Greenwood and Freehills. The applicants claimed that the seized documents were subject to legal professional privilege.

The court was required to determine whether the documents in question were indeed privileged under the common law test and whether a waiver of privilege by the liquidator of the third respondent affected the privilege claimed by the applicants. The common law test for legal professional privilege involves a "sole purpose" test, which considers whether the document was created for the purpose of giving or receiving legal advice or for use in existing or anticipated litigation.

After reviewing the evidence and the documents, Branson J found that certain documents were privileged, while others were not. The court held that the documents numbered 1, 2 (excluding a specific memorandum), and 11 were privileged, while Document 12 was not. The court also ruled that the waiver of privilege by the liquidator of the third respondent was ineffective as it did not include the consent of all parties entitled to the privilege.

In conclusion, the Federal Court of Australia declared that certain documents seized by the Australian Federal Police were subject to legal professional privilege, while others were not. The court further ordered that the privileged documents be returned to the applicants or, in the alternative, to the third respondent. The court did not specify any further orders at the time of the judgment.