In the Tribunal`s view, the disclosure of the corridors did not serve the interests that justified the privilege. For example, communications were made outside the presence of a lawyer (although, as the court found, the lawyers were nearby) and were not made for the purpose of providing legal advice. The court simply characterized these communications as “a discussion of having a JDA member pass on his independent and non-legal research to another JDA member, while finding that he had sent the same research to his lawyer.”  In addition, the court stated that “the mere fact that the communications took place among the co-accused who had joined a common defence agreement was not sufficient to protect the statements from disclosure.” No good discussion about the JDAs begins without first discussing the doctrine of the common interest; A concept that breathes life into all JDAs. The teaching of the common interest (sometimes called the common privilege of the defence) is an extension of solicitor-client privilege. It allows parties who have a common interest in defeating a mutual legal opponent to freely share information without worrying about waiving solicitor-client privilege regarding their disclosure. In litigation, co-accused often have a common interest in defeating the complainant`s claims. Especially in situations where co-accused do not attempt to blame the blame, the courts have recognized that the accused can defend themselves together and share trust and secrets (as well as expenses). In this context, communications between the defendants would not be protected in subsequent disputes between them, but communications would be protected from discovery by the applicants. If left uncorrected, these differences can jeopardize all parties to the common defence agreement.
An important provision of any common defence agreement is therefore to deal precisely with what happens when a party decides to denounce or abandon it. Commercial transactions, disputes and disputes often involve several clients with concerted interests, but with different lawyers. Clients and their advisors often want to communicate with other clients and consultants without risking renouncing existing privileges or immunities. Clients and legal advisers can benefit from the options developed by the courts, including through the common defence or the common interest. When a party to a common defense agreement decides to cooperate with the government, the potential for disclosure of confidential information also threatens other sixth amendment rights. (Quotes are omitted). Federal courts have an independent interest in streamlining criminal proceedings within the ethical standards of the profession and for judicial proceedings to appear fair to all who observe them. Courts also have an independent interest in protecting a fair trial from trial tactics that can be used to create appeal issues. Given the high potential for absurdity, courts have every right to seek common defence agreements before making problems.
 The purpose of this email is to recall our discussions yesterday about the common interests of our customers in FIFA.