A single decision to disclose—or remain silent—can carry profound legal and ethical consequences
 

Author:

K Layman
 

Summary:

The “no tipping off” (NTO) rule prohibits legal practitioners from informing clients that a suspicious transaction report (STR) has been filed with the Financial Intelligence Centre. From a professional conduct perspective, this gives rise to a tension between, on the one hand, the duty to report suspected money laundering and other irregular activity and, on the other, the obligation to maintain client trust and act in good faith. As a result, attorneys may face adverse consequences whichever path they choose. While transparency between legal practitioners and clients is fundamental, the NTO rule may require a practitioner to act in a manner that appears to betray that trust. This article examines this underexplored tension and argues that priority should be accorded to the NTO rule over the duty owed to the client. Regardless of whether one agrees with this position, the article calls for open discussion and legislative reform to clearly define and address the existing “grey area”, thereby reducing the uncertainty currently confronting legal practitioners.


Link to Journal Article