{"id":622,"date":"2025-08-04T18:31:05","date_gmt":"2025-08-04T21:31:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mirandaarcentales.com.br\/?p=622"},"modified":"2025-08-04T18:31:05","modified_gmt":"2025-08-04T21:31:05","slug":"attorney-client-privilege-prevents-a-cooperation-agreement-against-a-former-client","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mirandaarcentales.com.br\/en\/attorney-client-privilege-prevents-a-cooperation-agreement-against-a-former-client\/","title":{"rendered":"ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE PREVENTS A COOPERATION AGREEMENT AGAINST A FORMER CLIENT"},"content":{"rendered":"

On July 14, 2025, Brazil\u2019s Superior Court of Justice (STJ) issued a landmark ruling reaffirming attorney-client privilege \u2014 even after the termination of the professional relationship and in cases where the attorney seeks to invoke \u201cself-defense.\u201d[1]<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The case sparked debate due to the lack of legal provisions governing cooperation agreements executed between attorneys and criminal authorities before the enactment of Law No. 14.365\/22. This law amended the Statute\u00a0Governing\u00a0the Practice of Law in Brazil to expressly prohibit attorneys from entering into cooperation agreements providing current or former clients\u2019 information to criminal authorities[1]<\/a>.<\/p>\n

In the case reviewed by the STJ, the defendant\u2019s former attorneys entered into a plea agreement that triggered Operation Sil\u00edcio[2]<\/a><\/strong>, an investigation into alleged crimes including money laundering, tax evasion, and procurement fraud.<\/p>\n

According to the cooperating attorneys, their client had arranged for the issuance of fraudulent invoices through the law firm to create a slush fund used to evade taxes and launder the illicit proceeds. The attorneys also alleged that part of this fund was used to pay bribes to public officials to secure a federal contract, therefore defrauding public bids.<\/p>\n

During the investigation, authorities authorized precautionary measures including freezing of assets and search and seizure operations, which led to the obtation of emails, spreadsheets, and fictitious invoices.<\/p>\n

The defendant \u2014 represented by new counsel \u2014 filed a habeas corpus<\/em> petition before the Federal Regional Court of the 3rd Region (TRF3), arguing that the plea agreement was void and that all evidence derived from it should be excluded. The defense claimed that the agreement was based on confidential information obtained during the attorney-client relationship, protected under the Statute\u00a0Governing\u00a0the Practice of Law in Brazil.<\/p>\n

The defense requested the annulment of the plea agreement and all resulting evidence, as well as the dismissal of the criminal investigation, due to a violation of attorney-client privilege.<\/p>\n

TRF3 rejected the petition, reasoning that:<\/p>\n