Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 20 JULY 2015

Solicitor-Client Privilege: The Quebec Securities Regulator Can Summon In-House Counsel To Testify In An Investigation

Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP
Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP
Contributor
Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

As one of Canada’s top business law firms, Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP (Blakes) provides...

View firm profile
Explore more from Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

On July 16, 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada denied leave to appeal to an in-house counsel (referred to as Ms. X to protect her identity) in the case of X v. Autorité des marchés financiers.

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

On July 16, 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) denied leave to appeal to an in-house counsel (referred to as Ms. X to protect her identity) in the case of X v. Autorité des marchés financiers. The SCC thus maintained the decision of the Quebec Court of Appeal, which had ruled that an in-house counsel could not claim immunity from disclosure by relying on solicitor-client privilege to decline to appear before the investigators of the Quebec securities regulator (the Autorité des marchés financiers or AMF) when summoned by them in the context of an investigation.

BACKGROUND

Ms. X has been in-house counsel in the legal department of a public multinational company for a number of years. In December 2013, the AMF summoned her to appear before one of its investigators to "testify as to everything you known about the file" in the context of an investigation focusing on trades made by the company. The AMF also issues an order prohibiting Ms. X from divulging to

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from