|
Ontario lawyers have recently been subjected to a new fraud scheme described in detail by Dan Pinnington of LawPro at http://www.slaw.ca/2009/05/11/warning-to-lawyers/ as: “In all cases, a previously unknown client retained the lawyer to do an incorporation three or four weeks ago. The client presented realistic looking photo ID (a newer Ontario driver licence). The lawyer completed the requested work and the client paid in full for the incorporation (usually with cash). CLIA insurance programs in Nova Scotia and Manitoba have also issued alerts to their insured members on learning of this scheme:
The Canadian Lawyers Insurance Association provides loss prevention information solely for the benefit of CLIA insured lawyers. The content and links provided in Loss Prevention eBytes are intended as resources to qualified lawyers who should exercise due care and their professional judgment in adapting or making use of any content.
The Ontario Court of Appeal recently decided in Stewart v. Humber River Regional Hospital, 2009 ONCA 350, that: …it is appropriate to apply the MacDonald Estate approach to assess whether, when an expert has received solicitor-client information from one party and then is retained by opposing counsel, opposing counsel has acquired that information. The court should infer that confidential information was imparted unless opposing counsel satisfies the court that no such information passed. The court must ask itself whether the reasonably informed member of the public would be so satisfied. This will be a heavy burden for opposing counsel to discharge. In this case, plaintiff counsel acting on two parallel claims against the defendant hospital retained an expert for the defence on one of those claims who had been examined for discovery in the other claim while still in the employ of the hospital. The court found that the expert was in possession of information protected by solicitor-client privilege, inferred that it was imparted to the plaintiff’s counsel, and determined that the plaintiff counsel did not discharge the onus of establishing that no confidential information was passed from the expert to counsel. The Court of Appeal upheld the lower court decision ordering the removal of counsel. The Canadian Lawyers Insurance Association provides loss prevention information solely for the benefit of CLIA insured lawyers. The content and links provided in Loss Prevention eBytes are intended as resources to qualified lawyers who should exercise due care and their professional judgment in adapting or making use of any content.
Given how commonplace the computer is in any law firm, it is easy to forget that the use of technology can call into play your professional obligations under your provincial Code of Professional Conduct. In the article, A Techno-Ethics Checklist -Basics for Being Safe, Not Sorry, published in the March 2009 issue of Law Practice, authors Erik Mazzone and David Ries provide a quick review of three essential areas in which errors and ethics violations can take place. They provide tips for:
Their conclusion is that “…effective information security is an ongoing process that requires your constant vigilance. The alternative involves substantial risk of loss of clients, ethics violations and malpractice claims.” The Canadian Lawyers Insurance Association provides loss prevention information solely for the benefit of CLIA insured lawyers. The content and links provided in Loss Prevention eBytes are intended as resources to qualified lawyers who should exercise due care and their professional judgment in adapting or making use of any content.
|
|
RSS Feed