Keefe v Marks (1989) 16 NSWLR 713
The Court of Appeal, applying Giannarelli, held that the common law immunity of barristers from liability for negligence extended to out of court work intimately connected with or ancillary to the conduct of a case in court.

Yates Property Corp v Boland (1997) 145 ALR 169 (first instance); (1999) 167 ALR 575 (HC)

Confirms immunity for statements of claim

However in a detailed discussion of the immunity, Kirby J indicated that he looked forward to a later opportunity to abolish the immunity.  His view was not supported by three other members of the bench who chose to express an opinion

Donellan v Watson (1990) 21 NSWLR 335

The immunity from litigation is not co-extensive between the role of barrister acting as an advocate and solicitor acting as an advocate, for the reasons given –

[a] solicitor enters into a binding contract wíth the client which may either expressly or by necessary implication limit the solicitor's authority as the agent of the client, in the conduct of the litigation .... For example, a solicitor ... is bound to take reasonable care to properly instruct competent counsel ...
[A] solicitor who briefs himself [or herself] may be liable in negligence of briefing an
incompetent advocate although not liable in negligence as advocate.

D’Orta-Ekenaike v Victorian Legal Aid [2005] HCA (12 March 2005)
Affirmed the common law in Australia as stated in Giannarelli v Wraith. The court also held that a solicitor is entitled to common law immunity from suit in respect of acts or omissions which, if done by an advocate, would be within the scope of the advocate’s common law immunity

NZ

Chamberlains v Lai [2006] NZSC 70

The Supreme Court has upheld the decision of the Court of Appeal to abolish the longstanding common law rule that barristers cannot be sued for work they do in Court and other work intimately connected with in-court work.

(f) Confidentiality
Must not disclose confidential communications with client

Lawyers have both an ethical and contractual duty to maintain the confidences of their clients. The issue of client confidentiality is fundamental to the fiduciary relationship between legal practitioner and client. A breach of client confidentiality is a breach of the agency principles relating to the fiduciary relationship.

A failure to maintain the confidence of a client can give rise to disciplinary proceedings for misconduct, whether the practitioner is practicing as a barrister or solicitor.

According to the Law Council of Australia's Model Rules, the protection is not limited to matters already protected by legal professional privilege.

The New South Wales Bar Rules 103 - 111 describe the circumstances where confidentiality provisions apply, and, where conflict of interest and confidentiality issues must be balanced. The confidentiality provisions apply to original and derivative materials relating to a client's matter, including lawyer's notes. The protection may extend beyond the death of a client. Additionally, certain matters covered by s120 of the Evidence Act, are also included, particularly work product of a litigant appearing in person. 

Exceptions to the general rule include those matters -
1. required by law to be disclosed;
2. required by a rule of court to be disclosed; (see s122(2) of the Evidence Act and Sevic v Roarty); and
3. required by a court order to be disclosed.

Tuckiar v R (1934) 52 CLR 335

The Court of Appeal held that “openly disclosing the privileged communication of his client… is wholly indefensible”  and that any such disclosure was a “grave breach of the confidence reposed in him by the prisoner”.  In this case disclosure of an admission resulted in acquittal and unable to get a new fair trial so no retrial ordered.

The Court of Appeal in Tuckiar made it quite clear that breaching client confidentiality for the sole purpose of correcting the implications of a past crime is unacceptable.

Bar Rules, rr 103-111

103. A barrister must not disclose (except as compelled by law) or use in any way in the course of practice confidential information obtained by the barrister concerning any person unless or until:
(a) the information has been published;
(b) the information is later obtained by the barrister from another person who is not bound by the confidentiality owed by the barrister to the first person and who does not give the information confidentially to the barrister; or
(c) the person has consented to the barrister disclosing or using the information generally or on specific terms.

104. A barrister must not disclose (except as compelled by law) or use confidential information under Rule 103(c) in any way other than as permitted by the specific terms of the person's consent.

105. A barrister will not have breached Rules 103 and 104 simply by showing briefs to a reader or to another barrister doing work as permitted by Rule 83, so long as the barrister has reminded the reader or the other barrister of barristers' duties of confidentiality including Rules 103 and 104.

106. A barrister who is shown a brief as a reader or under an arrangement covered by Rule 83 is bound by the same duties of confidentiality which bind the barrister whose brief it is, including the duties imposed by Rules 103 and 104.

107. A barrister who has accepted a brief must return the brief as soon as possible after the barrister becomes aware that the barrister has information confidential to a person other than the client which may, as a real possibility, be helpful to the client's case or to the advancement of the client's interests, being information which the barrister is prohibited from disclosing or using by Rules 103, 104 or 106, unless the person entitled to the confidentiality consents to the barrister disclosing or using the information as the barrister thinks fit.

108. A barrister who is briefed to appear for two or more parties in any case must determine as soon as possible whether the interests of the clients may, as a real possibility, conflict and, if so, the barrister must then return the brief for:
(a) all the clients in the case of confidentiality to which Rule 103 would apply; or
(b) in other cases, one or more of the clients:
(i) giving preference to the earliest brief if the barrister was briefed at different times; and
(ii) so as to remove that possibility of conflict.

109. A barrister who, during the hearing of the case, becomes aware that the interests of the clients or some of them do or may, as a real possibility, conflict, must return the brief for:
(a) all the clients in the case of confidentiality to which Rule 103 would apply; or
(b) in other cases, one or more of the clients:
(i) giving preference to the earliest brief if the barrister was briefed atdifferent times; and
(ii) so as to remove that possibility of conflict.

110. A barrister need not return any briefs to appear under Rules 108 or 109, if the barrister has informed the instructing solicitor or the clients, as the case may be, of the barrister's view as to the clients' conflicting interests, and the instructing solicitor or the clients, as the case may be, inform the barrister that all the clients nonetheless wish the barrister to continue to appear for them.

111. A barrister who believes on reasonable grounds that the interests of the client may conflict with the interests of the instructing solicitor, or that the client may have a claim against the instructing solicitor, must:
(a) advise the instructing solicitor of the barrister's belief; and
(b) if the instructing solicitor does not agree to advise the client of the barrister's belief, seek to advise the client in the presence of the instructing solicitor of the barrister's belief.

(g) Conflict

Nangus v Charles Donovan [1989] VR 184*

The general rule is that counsel ought not appear for two clients whose interests may conflict.  The court is concerned that it should have the assistance of independent counsel for parties whose interests are not identical in the case before it.

In circumstances where counsel represents two (apparently conflicting parties) it will be for the court to determine whether there may be a departure from the prima facie rule.

Bar Rules, r 108 – If a conflict arises between citizens because of confidentiality then must return briefs.

108. A barrister who is briefed to appear for two or more parties in any case must determine as soon as possible whether the interests of the clients may, as a real possibility, conflict and, if so, the barrister must then return the brief for:
(a) all the clients in the case of confidentiality to which Rule 103 would apply; or
(b) in other cases, one or more of the clients:
(i) giving preference to the earliest brief if the barrister was briefed at different times; and
(ii) so as to remove that possibility of conflict.