The defendant moved to remove opposing counsel on the basis of concurrent representation and misuse of confidential information arising from an asset purchase transaction and related holdback dispute.
The court found that the law firm acted on behalf of the moving party in attempting to collect an account receivable and then, while still retained or at minimum before that retainer ended, acted against the moving party by demanding holdback payments for the responding parties.
Applying the MacDonald Estate framework and the bright line rule from Neil and McKercher, the court held that confidential financial information had been conveyed and that the retainers were sufficiently related.
The court concluded that disqualification was required to protect the administration of justice.
The motion to remove counsel was granted.
