Confidentiality Considerations — Lawyer/App Client Contact Sharing Concerns, Canadian Conflict Called


Just “Smartphones”? Or are cloud/server/desktop-enacted LinkedIn/Outlook/Microsoft Groups integrations also in scope (amongst other facts flows)?: “New York Bar Challenges Ethics Opinion on Protecting ‘Confidential’ Consumer Identification Information and facts on Smartphones” —

  • “On April 8, 2022, the New York Bar issued an impression to shield “confidential” client identity information and facts stored on an attorney’s smartphone. In certain, the view prohibits an attorney who stores ‘confidential’ (as outlined underneath Rule 1.6 of the New York Rules of Professional Carry out) customer id data in the attorney’s “contacts” folder on the attorney’s smartphone from consenting to share their “contacts’ with a smartphone application, unless selected conditions are achieved.”
  • “The feeling is primarily based on Rule 1.6(c), which presents that an legal professional is essential to ‘make sensible efforts’ to avert the disclosure of “confidential’ client data. The view explains that, prior to an lawyer grants entry to his or her smartphone’s contacts folder, the legal professional ought to initial decide no matter if any get hold of information is ‘confidential’ shopper information and facts in just the meaning of Rule 1.6. If clients’ names constitute ‘confidential’ details, the view states that an lawyer will have to ‘make affordable attempts to reduce the unauthorized obtain of other folks to individuals names, no matter whether stored as a paper duplicate in a filing cabinet, on a smartphone, or in any other electronic or paper kind.’”
  • “If the attorney’s smartphone ‘contacts’ folder is made up of ‘confidential’ consumer details, the attorney may possibly not consent to share the contacts folder with a smartphone application, except the legal professional decides that (1) no human being will perspective the info and (2) the data will not be sold or transferred to additional 3rd functions, devoid of the client’s consent.”

Former Alberta justice minister, ex-regulation husband or wife accused of conflict of interest in Kamikaze marketing campaign probe” —

  • “Former Alberta justice minister Jonathan Denis and his ex-law lover Dale Fedorchuk have been accused of conflict of curiosity in link with the Kamikaze marketing campaign investigation — and of making one customer ‘the scapegoat’ for yet another: United Conservative Bash heavyweight Jeff Callaway.”
  • “The allegation arrived out in an interview Cameron Davies, Callaway’s former communications director, gave to the Office environment of the Election Commissioners (OEC) as portion of its probe into Callaway’s 2017 UCP management marketing campaign. He also accused the two attorneys of breaching solicitor-customer privilege, details of which are contained in the OEC investigator’s job interview transcript and summary received by CBC Information.”
  • “Davies was Callaway’s co-marketing campaign manager and ran communications. He informed investigators he’d persuaded a number of persons to go together with putting their names on donations they didn’t make — and obtained two $7,500 fines in February 2019 for obstructing the investigation into the campaign by Alberta’s election commissioner. Davies was also fined $12,000 for facilitating irregular donations for the Callaway marketing campaign.”
  • “But the transcripts from the 1st in-person interview Davies gave to election commissioner investigators in March 2019 — a thirty day period just after his obstruction high-quality — involve allegations that his lawyer, Fedorchuk, was not performing in his best interest.”
  • “Instead, he alleges that the lawyer gave privileged data to his legislation spouse, Denis, in purchase to aid yet another client under investigation by the OEC: Callaway”
  • “When contacted by CBC News, Fedorchuk and Denis stated by means of Guardian Regulation that solicitor-consumer privilege stops them from responding to these allegations — or even ensure their involvement in the case. Davies subsequently sent Guardian Legislation an e-mail waiving his privilege for this story, but Guardian Legislation and Fedorchuk reiterated they’d be violating privilege have been they to reply any of the inquiries.”
  • “The job interview and investigator’s summary involve certain claims built by Davies, which would violate Law Modern society of Alberta regulations if demonstrated exact.”
  • “Running a dim horse marketing campaign like Callaway’s is not versus electoral legislation in by itself. But much of its funding was, in accordance to a months-prolonged investigation by the election commissioner’s place of work.”
  • “In the OEC job interview, Davies reported when he realized he could be specific by the commission’s investigation, he was originally referred to Denis, who served as Alberta’s lawyer general and justice minister from 2012 to 2015. But Davies stated the former Progressive Conservative cupboard minister assigned the case to Fedorchuk, his then-associate at Guardian Legislation Team.”
  • “What he did not know then, he reported, is that Denis was representing Callaway. If a law organization is symbolizing two clientele who may possibly have unique interests, it is necessary to at minimum make an ethical wall between the two, College of Calgary assistant professor of legislation Gideon Christian suggests.”
  • “‘You are unable to be a slave to two masters,’ he explained. ‘The law firm should have place in put a construction to protect against private data to be exchanged in between the two attorneys acting on behalf of various people today in this circumstance.’”
  • “Davies advised investigators that no this sort of wall existed. In truth, he stated Denis was often current on privileged phone phone calls between himself and Fedorchuk.”


Resource link