I write in connection with last week’s article ‘Putting yourself first’, which reflected on the duty criminal defence lawyers owe to their clients (see [2008] Gazette, June 19, 28).

Contrary to the article, it seems to me that ‘the public interest in the administration of justice’ may require that a conflict between rules of conduct be resolved in favour of the duty to the client; and in advising a client not to comply (until the position is clarified on appeal) with a court order that appears to be illegal, undermines legal privilege and is not in the client's interest.

Otherwise, what is administered may be not justice but injustice. The article itself refers to the principle of legal privilege as being the ‘foundation on which the administration of justice rests’. Will the Law Society seek a judicial declaration to clarify the position?

If, in fact, solicitors are required by the new conduct rules to give effect to a court order that is illegal (that is, the order would be held to be so by a higher court), then it seems to me that the rules should be judicially reviewed, as this is clearly unreasonable, and tends to undermine the rule of law.