Supreme Court of Canada: In the instant case, the constitutionality of certain provisions of Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act, S.C. 2000, c. 17, and the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Regulations, SOR/2002-184, requiring the financial intermediaries including lawyers to collect information verifying the identity of their clients and allows the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada to search and seize the material, was challenged. The Federation of Law societies brought up the challenge to the Court as the impugned legislations deeply affects the principle of solicitor-client privilege. The Court struck down Sections 33.3, 33.4, 33.5, and 59.4 of the impugned Regulations and ordered that Section 11.1 of the impugned Regulations be read down to exclude the legal profession from its ambit.
Delivering the judgment, Cromwell, J. observed that provisions of the impugned legislations authorize searches of law offices inherently risking the breach of solicitor-client privilege. It was further observed that the impugned legislations mandates warrantless searches, examining and copying documents of proceeds until the privilege is asserted which leads to the revelation of the names and address of the clients which is otherwise subject to privilege. The Court stated that the privilege must remain absolute and there should be strict rules ensuring its protection along with non- interference of violative legislations. In a concurring opinion on the issue, McLachlin, C.J. and Moldaver J., observed that solicitor-client relationship is a recognized constitutional norm and a principle of fundamental justice, therefore breach of the same would amount to deprivation of liberty, thereby violating Section 7 of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
As per the facts of the instant case, the impugned legislations were passed in order to curb the menace of money laundering and terrorist financing. The lawyers objected to the provisions contending that the provisions make them unwilling state agents to collect information of their clients, thereby turning the law offices into archives for the police and the prosecution. Canada (Attorney General) v. Federation of Law Societies of Canada, 2015 SCC OnLine Can SC 2, decided on 13.02.2015