The duty
of confidentiality owed to one client may be inconsistent with the duty of candour owed to another client depending on whether information obtained by the lawyer during either retainer would be relevant to both retainers.
As the duty of confidentiality continues after the retainer is completed, the duty
of confidentiality owed to a former client may conflict with the duty of candour owed to a current client if information from the former matter would be relevant to the current matter.
Concerns the scope of the duty
of confidentiality owed by HMRC in respect of the affairs of taxpayers.
The duty
of confidentiality owed by lawyers to their clients is one of the foundations of the attorney - client relationship.
LAPs refer in their materials to rules of confidentiality, but for integrated bars in particular, the mission of the bar association itself (typically phrased in some form of «protect the public») is directly at odds with the idea
of confidentiality owed to the LAP participant.
Not exact matches
In addition, Innovative Dining Group may disclose personally identifiable information about you to other companies or individuals in the following circumstances: - Innovative Dining Group utilizes third party service providers to provide products, services or functions on IDG's behalf (such as sending emails or processing credit cards or fulfilling orders placed online) and asks these service providers to agree to maintain the
confidentiality of your personally identifiable information and not to use your personally identifiable information for any reason except to carry out the purpose (s) for which we retained them; - Innovative Dining Group needs to protect its legal rights (e.g., if Innovative Dining Group is trying to collect money you
owe); - Innovative Dining Group must comply with applicable laws, regulations or legal or regulatory processes; - Innovative Dining Group has reason to believe that someone may be causing injury to someone or interfering with - In connection with a sale, merger, transfer, exchange or other disposition
of all or a portion
of the business conducted by the web site.
The dominant thread throughout all
of these emails is that P. Jones was genuinely trying to protect the
confidentiality he felt he
owed the suppliers
of the data he used.
Firms
owe duties
of commitment,
confidentiality and candour to their clients.
Those jurisdictions do, however, recognise that lawyers
owe a duty
of confidentiality over documents provided to them by their clients.
In any case, these interpretations have strong implications for the legal profession and, in particular, the duty
of confidentiality legal professionals
owe to
Lawyers providing unbundled legal services
owe the same duties
of competence, diligence, loyalty and
confidentiality to limited - scope clients that they
owe to full - service clients.
In any case, these interpretations have strong implications for the legal profession and, in particular, the duty
of confidentiality legal professionals
owe to... [more]
In any case, these interpretations have strong implications for the legal profession and, in particular, the duty
of confidentiality legal professionals
owe to their clients.
Advising a digital communications agency on breach
of confidentiality obligations
owed by a current employee to a former employer.
It was a well - established principle
of the law
of confidentiality that where information
of a personal or confidential nature was obtained or received in the exercise
of a legal power or in furtherance
of a public duty, the recipient would
owe a duty to the person from whom the information was received or it relates (in this case, the taxpayer).
We do not
owe any duty
of confidentiality to any persons who send unsolicited email messages, mail, or facsimiles to our firm, lawyers, or other employees listed on this website without our advance and express authorization.
[3] Although lawyers who serve as third - party neutrals do not have information concerning the parties that is protected under Rule 1.6, they typically
owe the parties an obligation
of confidentiality under law or codes
of ethics governing third - party neutrals.
There has been a lot
of debate over what adverse effects alternative business structures and ownership models will have on the core values
of the legal profession, including lawyer independence, client
confidentiality, and the duties
owed by lawyers to a client — particularly the duty to avoid conflicts
of interest.
The July 1977 Report
of the Privacy Protection Study Commission recommended that «each medical - care provider be considered to
owe a duty
of confidentiality to any individual who is the subject
of a medical record it maintains, and that, therefore, no medical care provider should disclose, or be required to disclose, in individually identifiable form, any information about any such individual without the individual's explicit authorization, unless the disclosures would be» for specifically enumerated purposes such as treatment, audit or evaluation, research, public health, and law enforcement.
Although the Committee does not believe that attorneys must develop a mastery
of the security features and deficiencies
of each technology available, the duties
of confidentiality and competence that attorneys
owe to their clients do require a basic understanding
of the electronic protections afforded by the technology they use in their practice.
The Proposed Opinion examines whether an attorney violates the duties
of confidentiality and competence he or she
owes to a client by using technology to transmit or store confidential client information when the technology may be susceptible to unauthorized access by third parties.
One would expect the fast pace
of change generally and increasing globalisation to be reflected in an increase in the exceptions to the duties
of confidentiality or secrecy
owed by banks to their customers.
However, since the Supreme Court
of Canada's decisions in R. v. Neil and Strother v. 3464920 Canada Inc., there is clearly increased sensitivity to the duties
of loyalty and
confidentiality that lawyers
owe their clients.
Current and former judges should
owe a duty
of confidentiality to protect the operation and the integrity
of the administration
of justice.
If the duty
of candour is
owed in respect
of everything known by the firm, aren't
confidentiality screens per se improper?
I was wondering: Do these unsolicited emails create attorney / prospective - client relationships such that the attorney
owes the duties
of confidentiality and competence?
The listing agent has a duty
of honesty to the customer, but not the duty normally
owed to a client
of confidentiality.
The Agency Disclosure Form stated that the Buyers were consenting to the agency relationship contained in the form and that the Buyer's Representative
owed the Buyers the duties
of loyalty, obedience,
confidentiality, accounting, and reasonable skill and care in performing these duties.
Unless some state statute provided otherwise, facilitators would
owe no duty
of confidentiality to any party and would be free to disclose everything they knew about each
of the parties to all parties, even to their detriment.
During the course
of its representation
of the Clients, the Brokerage never presented the Clients with a statutorily - required notice that advises the client
of the «duties
of limited representation» that a real estate licensee
owes its client as a transaction broker, such as the duties
of care, skill, and
confidentiality.
The form states that a buyer's representative agrees to act solely on behalf
of the buyer and
owes certain fiduciary duties to the buyer, such as undivided loyalty,
confidentiality, full disclosure, obedience, and a duty to account.
Under designated agency, the agency obligation
of client
confidentiality is
owed at the level
of the industry member acting as the designated agent.
As the designated agent
of both the seller and the buyer, the industry member would
owe conflicting duties
of loyalty,
confidentiality and representing best interests, to the seller and buyer.
However, to do this would require the brokerage to breach its duty
owed as rental property manager to the owner to maintain the
confidentiality of information.
The agency obligation
of client
confidentiality — whether personal information, information relating to the service agreement or relating to a specific transaction — is
owed at the level
of the brokerage.
A dual agent does, however, still
owe a duty
of confidentiality of material information and accounting for funds.