{"id":1729,"date":"2013-07-15T11:59:59","date_gmt":"2013-07-15T15:59:59","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.jefflilaw.com\/?p=1729"},"modified":"2013-07-15T12:01:09","modified_gmt":"2013-07-15T16:01:09","slug":"supreme-court-modifies-conflicts-of-interest-rules-for-lawyers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/jefflilaw.com\/zh\/supreme-court-modifies-conflicts-of-interest-rules-for-lawyers\/","title":{"rendered":"\u6700\u9ad8\u6cd5\u9662\u4fee\u6539\u5f8b\u5e08\u5229\u76ca\u51b2\u7a81\u89c4\u5219"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>[Source: Legal Post]<\/p>\n<p>The Supreme Court of Canada today clarified the rules under which lawyers may act against existing clients.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe result is a great one for advocates of choice, because the court ruled that clients were free to choose their lawyers and lawyers were free to act for them unless there was a real risk of mischief,\u201d says Malcolm Mercer of McCarthy T\u00e9trault LLP, who represented the Canadian Bar Association.<\/p>\n<p>The decision, <em>Canadian National Railway v. McKercher LLP<\/em>, affects a wide range of clients \u2014 from large companies who must rely on the limited number of major firms in Canada\u2019s legal market for representation in significant transactions and litigation, to consumers from rural and remote areas that are served by only a few lawyers. It is also a blow to those who advocated a bright line rule forbidding lawyers from acting against current clients or former clients without first obtaining their consent. Indeed, the court ruled that even lawyers who breach conflicts of interest rules by acting against existing clients without obtaining consent to do so may still avoid disqualification from continuing as counsel in the proceedings.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/business.financialpost.com\/2013\/07\/05\/supreme-court-modifies-conflicts-of-interest-rules-for-lawyers\/\">Read more\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>[Source: Legal Post] The Supreme Court of Canada today clarified the rules under which lawyers may act against existing clients. \u201cThe result is a great one for advocates of choice, because the court ruled that clients were free to choose&hellip;<\/p>\n<p class=\"more-link-p\"><a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/jefflilaw.com\/zh\/supreme-court-modifies-conflicts-of-interest-rules-for-lawyers\/\">Read more &rarr;<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[396,123,308,124],"tags":[595,605,604,597,434,603],"class_list":["post-1729","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-business-law-blog","category-english","category-litigation-blog","category-news-articles","tag-client","tag-conflicts-of-client","tag-existing","tag-law-firm","tag-lawyer","tag-supreme-court-of-canada"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p1MD0B-rT","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/jefflilaw.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1729","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/jefflilaw.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/jefflilaw.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jefflilaw.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jefflilaw.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1729"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/jefflilaw.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1729\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1731,"href":"https:\/\/jefflilaw.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1729\/revisions\/1731"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/jefflilaw.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1729"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jefflilaw.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1729"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jefflilaw.com\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1729"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}