The defendants brought a motion seeking removal of the plaintiffs’ law firm on the basis of an alleged conflict of interest arising from a lawyer who previously acted for some defendants sharing office space with the plaintiffs’ counsel and being described as “of counsel.” The moving parties argued that the physical proximity and prior involvement in related matters created a risk of confidential information being shared.
Applying the Supreme Court of Canada test from MacDonald Estate v. Martin, the court considered whether a reasonably informed person would conclude that confidential information would be used.
The court found the evidence showed separate practices, systems, and files, and that the lawyer’s involvement in the present matter had ended well before the office‑sharing arrangement.
The motion to remove the plaintiffs’ counsel was therefore dismissed.
