James Hardie (Investigations and Proceedings) Act 2004

Abrogation of privilege for investigations and proceedings

Legal professional privilege is abrogated in relation to James Hardie material for the purposes of, or in connection with:

a James Hardie investigation; or

a James Hardie proceeding.

Without limiting the generality of subsection (1), a claim of legal professional privilege in relation to James Hardie material does not prevent an authorised person from:

requesting or requiring the production or provision of James Hardie material; or

exercising a power under:

a warrant issued under section 36 of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001; or

section 37 of that Act;

in relation to James Hardie material; or

receiving or using James Hardie material;

for the purposes of, or in connection with, a James Hardie investigation or a James Hardie proceeding.

To avoid doubt, section 69 of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 does not apply in relation to James Hardie material for the purposes of, or in connection with, a James Hardie investigation or a James Hardie proceeding.

Admissibility of evidence

Without limiting the generality of subsection (1), despite:

Division 1 of Part 3.10 of the Evidence Act 1995, or a similar law of a State or Territory; and

paragraph 76(1)(d) of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001;

a claim of legal professional privilege in relation to James Hardie material does not prevent that material from being admissible in evidence in a James Hardie proceeding.

Authorised persons not affected

This section does not abrogate or affect any claim of legal professional privilege made by an authorised person in relation to James Hardie material.