Facts
The appellants, [A.A.] and [B.A.] , appealed against the decision of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich, which granted the release of attorney [B.] from attorney-client privilege with regard to them. Attorney [B.] had filed a request for release from attorney-client privilege in order to enforce his fee claims against the appellants. The Supervisory Commission for Attorneys in the Canton of Zurich had granted this request.
The appellants argued that there had never been an attorney-client relationship between them and attorney [B.] and that the lower court had arbitrarily established the facts. They requested the reversal of the administrative court's judgment and the dismissal of the request for release from professional secrecy.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined the admissibility of the appeal and came to the conclusion that the appeal in public law matters is generally available. The appellants were particularly affected by the decision of the lower court and had a legitimate interest in its reversal or modification.
The Federal Court rejected the appellants' complaint that the lower court had arbitrarily established the facts. The question of whether an attorney-client relationship existed between the appellants and the attorney was not the subject of the Federal Court proceedings. The release from attorney-client privilege is justified if the attorney can provide serious indications that may indicate a mandate.
The Federal Court confirmed that attorneys are subject to professional secrecy without time limit and vis-à-vis anyone, and that the judicial…