Although a lawyer is the agent of their clients in some respects and it is possible that a lawyer would tie his client to a contract, the court rejected the idea that a client could hire him. (Toboggan. opn., 15.) Therefore, because of their mere representation of the applicants, the lawyers were not involved in the transaction and were not related to the transaction. Therefore, the ground taken from a breach of the settlement agreement would be opposed to the applicants. The court has not decided whether the complainants would have a lawsuit against their lawyers, but this seems likely given the ethical risks associated with disclosure. (Id.at p. 16) Many transaction agreements contain confidentiality rules. These provisions can be applied through jurisdictional or arbitration clauses, liquidation claim clauses and applicable legal fees rules. But what if the lawyer of one of the settler parties spills the beans? Is the lawyer or his firm contractually responsible for this offence to the aggrieved party? The schechter opinion also raises other questions. What is the consideration associated with the lawyer`s agreement? Does the lawyer`s signature bind the entire firm or just the lawyer? What if the lawyer does not have the right to hire the firm? Would the contractual obligation follow the lawyer if he or she left the firm? Would this apply to new lawyers and collaborators who were not in the company at the time of signing the transaction agreement? In response to the assertion that “it would be contrary to public policy in favour of settlement of transactions, to claim that it is not possible to require lawyers to maintain a confidential transaction contract,” the Tribunal suggested that lawyers be explicitly required to sign parties and that they be expressly required to sign as such. (Slip.
opn., 20-21.) So how do you make sure the right person has signed the transaction contract to make it applicable? In Monster Energy Co. v. Schechter 7 Cal.5th 781, (Cal. 2019) the California Supreme Court has ruled that a lawyer`s signature on a settlement contract acknowledging that it has been “approved in form and content” may reflect the lawyer`s intention to be bound to the agreement. In this case, Wendy Crossland and Monster Energy Company sued for product liability. The transaction agreement contained a confidentiality provision.