To what Extent do Lawyers need to Supervise Document Disclosure?

Associate

November 8, 2021

In 2020, several US court decisions dealt with lawyers who failed to properly supervise the discovery process, for example by allowing their clients to “self-collect” records (see Equal Emp’t Opportunity Comm’n v. M1 5100 Corp., Civil No. 19-cv-81320-DIMITROULEAS/MATTHEWMAN (S.D. Fla. Jul. 2, 2020)) or not taking reasonable effort to ensure that the client produced all required documents (see Optronic Techs. v. Ningbo Sunny Elec. Co., Case No. 16-cv-06370-EJD (VKD) (N.D. Cal. Jun. 1, 2020)).

In the first example, the lawyer received a warning from the judge, but escaped sanctions because the discovery process was not yet complete. … Read More

Towards More Efficient and Cost-effective Discovery

Crystal O’Donnell

Chief Executive Officer and Senior Counsel

November 3, 2021

Discovery is typically the most time-consuming and expensive aspect of any legal dispute. This article provides some practical guidance and key tips for minimizing risk and cost for enterprises involved in disputes or regulatory matters that require the production of electronically stored information (ESI).

The most effective way to minimize eDiscovery cost and risk is to start with good document management and retention policies. While document management and retention are substantive and complex areas, there are a couple things that do not require software or expenditure that can make a substantial difference. … Read More

eDiscovery Issues: Spoliation and Intent

Harry Chang

Associate

October 28, 2021

In a recent US decision, Cretacci v. Hare, No.: 4:19-CV-55-SKL (E.D. Tenn. Jan. 20, 2021), the court found that the plaintiffs failed to prove that the defendants intentionally deprived them of the video evidence of an alleged assault as required under Rule 37 of the United States Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The defendants had received a written request to preserve the video evidence from the plaintiff’s counsel within 30 days of an alleged assault but took no reasonable measures to preserve the requested video, and the video was later deleted.… Read More

Cost-Effective Document Disclosure in Construction Arbitration

Martin Felsky

Senior Counsel

October 22, 2021

There are four rules-based approaches to document disclosure in legal disputes. From broadest to narrowest they are:

Relevant: Each party discloses all documents relevant to the issues in dispute.
Responsive: Each party discloses documents responsive to requests by the other party.
Material: Each party discloses only those documents that could have an impact on the outcome of the dispute.
Reliance: Each party discloses only those documents upon which it intends to rely.

Each of these approaches is often supplemented by two underlying principles: first, a party can always be ordered to produce a document the arbitrator deems relevant (which enhances fairness but expands disclosure), and second, all disclosure models may be subject to proportionality, so that the cost of disclosure does not overtake its value to the parties.… Read More

Discovery in the Yukon

Vladyslav (Vlad) Strashko

Associate

October 20, 2021

A recent decision, Chance Oil and Gas Limited v Yukon (Energy, Mines and Resources), 2021 YKSC 44 (CanLII) , provides a good window into the discovery process in the Yukon.

In this case, both sides filed applications to compel each other to meet their document discovery obligations. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant grossly under-produced by listing only 445 documents in its affidavit of documents. The defendant alleged that the plaintiff, in contrast, overproduced by listing over 34,000 documents, some of which were not relevant.

First, the court pointed that the expression “every document relating to any matter in issue in an action” relating to disclosure obligations in Rule 25 of the Rules of Court has been given a broad and liberal interpretation by the courts.… Read More