Civil Fraud Recovery
Print this page
OVERVIEW
Fraud is an unfortunate reality in modern business, particularly for companies in the banking, financial, and insurance industries.
Lawyers of our Civil Fraud Recovery Group have experience with these industries. They are intimately familiar with the complicated legal regime that regulates fraud prosecutions and civil actions to recover assets or money lost through deceit.
Our lawyers have been successful in recovering millions of dollars for the benefit of our clients. Lawyers from the Civil Fraud Recovery Group have investigative experience and assist our clients in delving into fraudulent claims and schemes.
SERVICES
A prompt and early response is frequently the best method to contain the effects of fraudulent conduct. On the recovery side, our Civil Fraud Recovery Group assists clients to proactively pursue legal remedies to address all forms of fraud, such as:
- employee theft and dishonesty;
- secret commission schemes;
- corporate espionage and security issues;
- mortgage fraud & fraudulent conveyances;
- bills of exchange (forgery and chequekiting);
- Internet and telemarketing fraud;
- investment fraud; and
- bankruptcy fraud.
As matters progress toward the courts, we provide a variety of services to facilitate recovery, including:
- surveillance and investigation;
- International asset tracing;
- money laundering (proceeds of crime) analysis;
- Mareva Injunctions;
- Anton Piller orders;
- discovery (Norwich Pharmacal) orders;
- assistance in making claims against fidelity bonds and insurance policies; and
- legal actions to trace and recover missing funds.
For our financial services clients, our Civil Fraud Recovery Group assists in civil recovery efforts and unravelling schemes such as mortgage fraud, securities fraud, and other forms of misrepresentation and deceit. For our corporate clients, our Civil Fraud Recovery Group also provides comprehensive risk management analysis, including the implementation of ‘whistleblower’ programs in addition to unravelling employee theft and procurement frauds. We also provide corporate governance and audit advice, as well as seminars to train our clients on the detection and investigation of fraudulent claims.
Our Civil Fraud Recovery Group, where needed, works closely with our Police Services Group and Investigation and Privacy Law Group. Our Civil Fraud Recovery Group lawyers are members of our “24/7” Emergency Response Team and will attend whenever and wherever our clients seek on-scene assistance that may arise from any type of incident.
CHAIR(S)
MEMBER(S)
FIRM CASES
PUBLICATIONS
View All
Causation And Standard Of Proof For A Hypothetical Pre-Trial Loss
First Published in Advocates Quarterly. This paper addresses whether the same principles regarding the “real and substantial possibility” standard of proof apply to a hypothetical past loss claim as they do to a hypothetical future loss claim, and the interplay between the two standards of proof applicable to hypothetical claims: balance of probabilities for the “but for” causation test, and “real and substantial possibility” for damages.
A Plea for Simple Pleadings
You have just been sued for breach of contract by a former business partner.
As you skim through a legal document that sets out a laundry list of your alleged failures and faux pas, a few paragraphs jump out at you. Why does the document make reference to an argument over the design of your company's logo? And why is there commentary on the not-so-secret office romance between two of your employees? As far as you can tell, neither of these issues have anything to do with the contract in dispute.
Common Interest Privilege: A New Tool in the Litigation Basket
In a recent decision, the Federal Court of Appeal confirmed that common interest privilege (“CIP”) is a principle of Canadian law. This principle is unlike solicitor-client privilege, in that communication between counsel and a third party may be considered privileged if the shared information is to benefit both parties, especially with respect to the furtherance of a commercial transaction. The court overturned a Federal Court decision which held that that CIP is not a principle of Canadian law.