Is a client entitled to keep his legal advice to himself?

The question which arises in the present context is not whether a client is entitled if he wishes to keep his legal advice to himself, a principle for which the bank cites ample authority, but whether the client, when he decides instead to raise part of the legal advice he has received in support of his position in an action, can then still claim privilege so as to exclude evidence of other parts of that advice. The problem is not one addressed in Dusik v. Newton.