CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND THE CONCEPT OF LOYALTY

Authors

  • Harvey L Morrison

Abstract

Until the Supreme Court’s decision in R. v. Neil,1 a lawyer’s duty of loyalty was little discussed by Canadian courts or commentators. Binnie J.’s explicit reliance on the concept of loyalty in Neil, however, brought loyalty out from the shadowy wings of legal discourse to centre stage. It is now common for a lawyer’s fiduciary duties to be considered in terms of loyalty. To paraphrase Lord Templeman in C.B.S. Songs Ltd. v. Amstrad Consumer Electronics Plc.,2 the fashionable claimant in cases involving conflicts of interest asserts a breach of the duty of loyalty. Loyalty seems to be like the new, bright, shiny tool that everyone wants to use, and use all of the time. There is, however, a danger that the useful edge of the loyalty concept may be dulled by use on the stony ground of situations for which it is not well suited. The objective of this article is to examine the origins and scope of the duty of loyalty as it applies to both current and former clients. Particular attention will be paid to the duration of that duty with respect to former clients.

Keywords:

Legal Profession, Conflicts of interest, Lawyers, Loyalty

Downloads

Total Downloads:

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2009-06-01

Issue

Section

Legal Commentary