Latest News

The Federal Court says issues of litigation and solicitor-client privilege trump the interests of an individual seeking the completion of his unjust dismissal hearing.
In late May, the court heard an application for judicial review in BMO v. Sasso seeking to set aside the order of an adjudicator made during a hearing under the provisions of the Canada Labour Code that dealt with documents the Bank of Montreal claimed were privileged.
The hearing concerned a complaint by a BMO investment specialist, Gianni Sasso, that he had been unfairly let go by the bank.
A customer of BMO claimed another employee at the institution named Gregory Rao had viewed his account, and that he had misappropriated funds from that account. (Rao was the customer’s brother-in-law.) It was later alleged Rao had defrauded other BMO clients of millions of dollars and BMO and Nesbitt Burns initiated proceedings against Rao.
The bank’s client brought an action against BMO saying he told Sasso about his suspicions regarding Rao’s activity.
“The allegation is my client dealt with it on a low level and didn’t escalate it to a manager. There’s no suggestion he was involved in any fraud,” says Sasso’s counsel Danny Kastner of Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP.
BMO retained external counsel from Norton Rose Canada LLP to conduct an investigation, including an interview with Sasso, and to provide legal advice.
Sasso was dismissed by BMO as a result of the internal investigation. His lawyer then sought to have BMO produce various documents emerging from the investigation including notes made by Norton Rose lawyer Jeremy Devereux from the interviews with Sasso.
However, BMO’s lawyers claimed two forms of privilege on the information — solicitor-client privilege and litigation privilege. Kastner argued neither applied.
“We said even if privilege did apply it was waived by the fact they were going to put their own lawyer on the stand to testify about what happened during the investigation,” he says.
The adjudicator agreed privilege didn’t apply but the issue was escalated by BMO to the Federal Court for judicial review.
Lawyers for BMO were contacted by Canadian Lawyer InHouse for this story but declined comment. The Federal Court decision states they argued the circumstances were “exceptional” and the adjudicator’s order would require BMO to disclose documents “it truly believes are subject to privilege.”
The judge asked the adjudicator to reconsider the analysis of the information — some 30 documents.
Judge Roger T. Hughes noted the Supreme Court of Canada has stated that where a claim for privilege has been raised, the documents should be examined by the decision-maker, or the decision-maker should be satisfied on reasonable grounds, as to the interests at stake.
“Given the relatively few documents at issue, it was a fundamental procedural error for the Adjudicator not to examine the documents before making a ruling. I am advised by Counsel for BMO that a booklet containing copies of these documents had been offered to the Adjudicator for this purpose,” wrote Hughes.
It was determined the adjudicator dealt with the litigation privilege issue but not the solicitor-client privilege.
“What the Federal Court judge has said is not that the adjudicator was wrong, but that some of her analysis was problematic and she needs to re-do the analysis and come to a new conclusion,” says Kastner. “The judge didn’t ultimately say her conclusion was wrong.”
Kastner says the adjudicator took only a “description” of the documents from BMO and did not read them.
“So the judge said given there weren’t that many documents she should have looked at them herself first before making a finding about privilege,” says Kastner.
That leaves Sasso in limbo because there has not been a definitive pronouncement on whether privilege does in fact apply to the documents in question.
“We were still in the middle of our administrative proceeding — the unjust dismissal proceeding — this was just a preliminary issue of production and normally the principle is you don’t get to interrupt an administrative proceeding and go up to court for judicial review in the middle of it,” says Kastner. “Otherwise what you get is this incredibly fragmented process for an individual going up against a bank. What the bank is now able to do is bring endless proceedings interrupting it on the privilege issue.”
Until now, Kastner says there weren’t any cases from the Federal Court about whether an administrative proceeding can be interrupted for a judicial review regarding privilege determinations.
While it may be unusual for a reviewing court to step in at the stage this one did, Erin Kuzz, of Sherrard Kuzz LLP, says in this case it made sense.
“The situation should be pretty rare when you can review during a proceeding, but when you have a situation where if the adjudicator had said, ‘turn over the documents,’ and the adjudicator had turned them over — you can’t un-see those,” she says. “When you’re dealing with situations where there are elements of adjudicating a case that are so critical that they can’t be undone — you can’t un-ring the bell.”
Kuzz says she was “pleased” to see the court was prepared to look at the issue midstream.
“It’s one of those things where privilege is so sacrosanct — it would have to be the most extraordinary of circumstances for privilege to not hold. No matter what side of adjudication you’re on, privilege is critical. I’m quite comforted the court took it as seriously as it did and was prepared to step in at the stage that it did,” she says.
When the issue of privilege was reviewed shouldn’t have mattered.
“At the end of the day protecting something like privilege takes precedent over any individual’s interest in any specific matter and has to,” she says.
Until now, there weren’t any Federal Court cases on whether an administrative proceeding can be interrupted for a judicial review of privilege, says Danny Kastner.
Until now, there weren’t any Federal Court cases on whether an administrative proceeding can be interrupted for a judicial review of privilege, says Danny Kastner.
The Federal Court says issues of litigation and solicitor-client privilege trump the interests of an individual seeking the completion of his unjust dismissal hearing.
Legal Leaders for Diversity's new chairwoman Melissa Kennedy, who is general counsel of the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan, said the legal profession has a duty to pursue initiatives like this for those with disabilities.
Legal Leaders for Diversity's new chairwoman Melissa Kennedy, who is general counsel of the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan, said the legal profession has a duty to pursue initiatives like this for those with disabilities.
Legal Leaders for Diversity is expanding its efforts to include a new initiative aimed at encouraging the hiring of those with disabilities in the legal profession.
Under the Competition Bureau’s Criminal Cartel Whistleblowing Initiative, it will protect the name of whistleblowers. (Image: Shutterstock)
Under the Competition Bureau’s Criminal Cartel Whistleblowing Initiative, it will protect the name of whistleblowers. (Image: Shutterstock)
The day after SNC Lavalin told employees it was offering immunity to staff who come forward with knowledge of corruption at the company, the Competition Bureau announced it is launching a whistleblowing initiative and a push to demonstrate transparency in its own operations.
A sign is seen in front of a neutron spectrometer used for fundamental scientific research at the Chalk River nuclear facility. Photo: Chris Wattie/Reuters.
A sign is seen in front of a neutron spectrometer used for fundamental scientific research at the Chalk River nuclear facility. Photo: Chris Wattie/Reuters.
A federal Crown agency is not immune and must comply with letters of request to provide evidence and testimony in foreign proceedings, the Ontario Court of Appeal has ruled.
Monday, 20 May 2013 08:00

Back to the future

Written by
b_150_0_16777215_00___images_stories_01-INHOUSE_Standard_photos_fred_krebs.jpgWhile much has changed over the past 20 to 30 years, there is still substantial continuity in the manner in which in-house counsel have contributed to the success of their employers. While the issues change and skills and techniques evolve, many of the basic concepts remain the same.
(l to r) Kathleen Bryan, CPR Institute; David Burt, DuPont; Barry Leon, Perley-Robertson Hill & McDougall LLP; and Sanjeev Dhawan, Hydro One Networks. Photo: Jennifer Brown
(l to r) Kathleen Bryan, CPR Institute; David Burt, DuPont; Barry Leon, Perley-Robertson Hill & McDougall LLP; and Sanjeev Dhawan, Hydro One Networks. Photo: Jennifer Brown
In-house counsel may be developing diverse internal departments and asking their external firms to staff with diversity in mind but when it comes to mediation or arbitration, diversity seems not to be on their radar.
A Vancouver-based company has won what is likely only the first round in a battle with former CEO over Mexican silver mines. (Photo: Shutterstock)
A Vancouver-based company has won what is likely only the first round in a battle with former CEO over Mexican silver mines. (Photo: Shutterstock)
A Vancouver-based mining company has won a $90-million equitable damages award against the former CEO and majority shareholder of its subsidiary for breach of fiduciary duty and self-dealing.
Monday, 29 April 2013 08:00

The perils of DIY contract drafting

Written by
b_150_0_16777215_00___images_stories_01-INHOUSE_2013_April_murn-meyrick.jpgCan a butterfly fluttering its wings cause a hurricane on the other side of the world? In other words, can the after effect of a seemingly insignificant event build and build to result in a catastrophic outcome? When it comes to drafting contracts, it seems the answer is yes!
The court says sponsors can’t be held accountable for participants’ injuries at sporting event.
The court says sponsors can’t be held accountable for participants’ injuries at sporting event.
Corporate sponsors who put up money to support a sporting event should not be held accountable in the case of an injury involving a participant, according to a recent Ontario Court of Appeal ruling.
Corporate law departments can learn from the military experience, says Maj.-Gen. Blaise Cathcart. Photo: Jennifer Brown
Corporate law departments can learn from the military experience, says Maj.-Gen. Blaise Cathcart. Photo: Jennifer Brown
He wears a uniform and has a legal team that makes decisions about life-and- death scenarios, often on the other side of the world, but Maj.-Gen. Blaise Cathcart says most corporate law departments can adopt his formula for in-house success.
<< Start < Prev 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next > End >>
Page 10 of 39

Latest Videos

More Canadian Lawyer TV...

Digital Editions