In Germany, attorney-client communication is not privileged as such. Rather, lawyers have the obligation and the right to not disclose confidential information. The Civil Procedure Code does not explicitly rule on the question of whether attorney-client communication held by the client is also protected. Given that disclosure does not play a significant role in civil litigation in Germany, there is no established case law relating to this issue. Based on a decision of the Regional Court of Karlsruhe and on scholarly writings, there is a basis for clients to argue that privilege should apply in this context. However, we consider that there is a considerable risk that privilege would not be extended to such communications. This is because even in criminal cases copies of attorney-client communications held by the client are, in principle, not protected (as the wording of the Criminal Procedure Code grants the right not to disclose confidential information only to lawyers). Nevertheless, by way of exception, documents that relate to a defense to alleged criminal or regulatory offenses must not be seized even if they are in the possession of the accused. This is to ensure that the confidentiality of communications with defense counsel is effectively guaranteed and follows from the right to an effective defense (as a part of the right to a fair trial), which is guaranteed by the German constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights. The limitations of this privilege from seizure are, however, unclear. For example, it is disputed whether or not documents relevant to a defense that are in a third party's (e.g., an expert's) possession also enjoy protection from seizure.

No. A change in the Criminal Procedure Code in 2015 has clarified that in criminal proceedings in-house lawyers are not entitled to refuse testimony in relation to information that was entrusted to them or became known to them in their capacity as in-house lawyer. As a consequence, documents prepared by in-house lawyers do not enjoy protection from seizure in criminal cases. In civil litigation, however, an in-house counsel may refuse to give testimony regarding information obtained from their employer if the in-house counsel is admitted to the bar. If this is the case, in-house counsel are not obliged to disclose corresponding documents.

Yes in civil cases (but only if the in-house lawyers are admitted to the bar), but no in criminal cases. In 2015, the German legislature decided that in-house lawyers are not entitled to refuse testimony in relation to information that was entrusted to them or became known to them in their capacity as in-house lawyer (section 53 No. 3 of the Criminal Procedure Code). As a consequence, documents prepared by in-house lawyers may be seized in criminal or regulatory situations.

Foreign lawyers who are admitted to the German bar are recognized for the purposes of privilege. Whether other foreign lawyers also enjoy privilege is disputed. A number of authors are of the view that all lawyers who are admitted to the bar in a Member State of the EU may invoke privilege. Occasionally, it is argued that all foreign lawyers should benefit from privilege (at least in criminal cases).

Yes. Certain nonlegal professionals like accountants and tax consultants are obliged to preserve confidentiality due to their rules of professional conduct. Again, this confidentiality obligation is mirrored by the right to refuse to divulge such information in civil and criminal procedures.

It should be noted, however, that due to regulations set out in the German Civil Procedure Code and the Legal Service Act, nonlegal professionals are not allowed to advise on legal issues without specific permission.