Today’s decision of the Court of Appeal in Ontario in Martin v. ConCreate USL Limited Partnership, 2013 ONCA 72 (“ConCreate”) confirms that restrictive covenants in commercial agreements without a fixed term are unenforceable.
The tl;dr version: Restrictive covenants of indefinite duration and subject to consent of indeterminate third parties are unenforceable. (more…)
I had the privilege of co-presenting with David Whelan, Manager, Legal Information, Law Society of Upper Canada (LSUC) at the LSUC’s 7th Annual Solo and Small Firm Conference and Expo (Two-Day Program) (View Program Agenda (PDF)). We presented on the topic of ”Using Social Media Tools in a Practical and Ethical Way”.
See David Whelan’s Blog for a copy of his excellent Power Point slideshow and paper.
Here’s my Power Point slideshow:
Here’s a link to a pdf copy of my paper: Using Social Media Tools in a Practical and Ethical Way. Pribetic
Kudos to the Program Co-Chairs for organizing an informative and interesting conference:
Michele Allinotte, Allinotte Law Office (Blog: http://yourcornwalllawyer.com/category/blog/) and
Daniel Pinnington, Vice President, Claims Prevention & Stakeholder RelationsLawyers’ Professional Indemnity Company (LawPro) (Blog: http://avoidaclaim.com/)
Image via Wikipedia
[2] The parties were involved in litigation. The respondent’s claim was for 1.8 million EUR. After mediation before a judge, the parties, both sophisticated commercial entities, entered into Minutes of Settlement. The Minutes provided for periodic payments totalling 1 million EUR over a period of two years. In the event of default, the appellant would consent to judgment in the amount of 1 million EUR. Paragraph 4 of the Minutes provided that the judgment would not give credit for any payments made before a default.
You can probably guess the result on appeal from summary judgment: De Post N.V. Van Publiek Recht/La Poste S.A. de Droit Public v. Key Mail Canada Inc., 2012 ONCA 161 (Ont. C.A.) per O’Connor A.C.J.O., Simmons J.A. and Perell J. (ad hoc)
In the inimitable words of Homer J. Simpson: “D’oh!”.
Image by Dave Stokes via Flickr
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) means different things to different people. To some it is a complex oxymoron. To others, it is the promise of a bright, shiny future.
By people, I include corporations, of course. It was, after all, Mitt Romney who famously quipped “corporations are people, my friend” in response to a heckler while campaigning for the GOP leadership in Iowa: (more…)
New York: E. T. Paull Music Co., 1897.
“Mandatory professional indemnity insurance & a mandatory insurer: A global perspective“, an article by Jennifer Ip (LAWPRO unit director and counsel (Litigation)) and Nora Rock, (LAWPRO corporate/policy writer), in the current issue of LAWPRO Magazine, is required reading for Canadian international law practitioners. The authors provide a comprehensive review of the recent malpractice crisis in the UK and a summary of professional errors & omissions insurance coverage in various jurisdictions.
The LAWPRO magazine also includes a Table summarizing Professional Indemnity Insurance Requirements Around The World. [available here (pdf)]
While many common-law jurisdictions (e.g. United Kingdom, Australia, Hong Kong and Singapore) and most continental European civil law jurisdictions have mandatory professional indemnity insurance coverage requirements, some do not.
The most glaring exception is the United States:
Oregon is currently the only state that requires lawyers to carry liability insurance.
Oregon lawyers must purchase their primary insurance through the Oregon bar’s Professional Liability Fund.19 In an article for Law Practice TODAY, the newsletter of the Law Practice Management section of the American Bar Association, law practice management expert, Ed Poll praised the Oregon program for its affordable premiums and universal coverage, noting that the premiums paid by Oregon lawyers “are much less than the nationwide average [voluntary] payment for malpractice insurance,” and that universal coverage in Oregon means that “[t]he playing field between large and small firms is at least manageable. And the public is truly protected.”20 Jeff Crawford of the Oregon bar’s Professional Liability Fund confirmed that the base premium for the current insurance year is $3,500 (for coverage of $300,000 per claim and $300,000 in the aggregate, plus a defence costs allowance of $50,000), a premium amount that, he notes, “if you consider inflation, has remained quite stable over the past several years.”
The upshot is that a “Google search” of a foreign lawyer’s website, law blog or asking for a “Twitter recommendation” is simply not good enough and the shortest path to a “negligent referral” claim. Due diligence requires that you not only evaluate the foreign lawyer’s credentials diligently (including local bar association status, disciplinary records, etc.), you must also request confirmation from the foreign lawyer whether he or she carries voluntary E&O insurance with sufficient minimum limits.
Forewarned is forearmed.
Antonin I. Pribetic
