The body representing European lawyers is seeking to intervene in a dispute between the European Commission and a Dutch company over whether documents prepared by the company's in-house lawyers and seized by the commission in a raid are privileged.

The move comes ahead of a European Parliament vote this month to grant in-house lawyers full privilege (see [2003] Gazette, 29 August, 6).

The Council of Bars and Law Societies of the European Union (CCBE) will hear this week whether it has been successful in intervening in the case involving Akzo Nobel Chemicals.

It is being represented by English barrister James Flynn QC of Brick Court Chambers.

Akzo Nobel has brought an action before the European Court of First Instance, seeking to annul the commission's decision to seize the documents and then to refuse to return them.

The CCBE is supporting Akzo Nobel, saying the commission has failed to comply with the procedures for determining disputes over the status of documents as laid down by the European Court of Justice in the 1982 AM&S case, which ruled that in-house lawyers do not enjoy privilege.

The move comes parallel to the European Parliament vote on an amendment to the draft takeover regulation, which has accelerated the CCBE's work on this issue.

The CCBE has no formal position on whether in-house counsel should be accorded privilege as it cannot form a consensus among its members.

In some European countries, in-house counsel are not allowed to join the bar and so are not formally regulated, meaning that in some eyes they should not enjoy privilege.

The CCBE set up a working party last year to investigate the issue further, but it has been overtaken by events.

It will now be discussed at forthcoming meetings with representatives of all the CCBE's members.

Secretary-general Jonathan Goldsmith said the organisation was 'urgently reviewing' the issue to see whether a common position could be established.