File No. 35399 in the SUPREME COURT of CANADA (ON APPEAL

File No. 35399

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA

(ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA)

BETWEEN: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA APPELLANT AND: THE FEDERATION OF LAW SOCIETIES OF CANADA RESPONDENT AND: LAW SOCIETY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA INTERVENER AND: CANADIAN BAR ASSOCIATION INTERVENER AND: BARREAU DU QUEBEC ET CHAMBRE DES NOTAIRES DU QUEBEC INTERVENER AND: CRIMINAL LAWYERS' ASSOCIATION INTERVENER AND: CANADIAN CIVIL LIBERTIES ASSOCIATION INTERVENER AND: THE ADVOCATES' SOCIETY INTERVENER

FACTUM OF THE RESPONDENT THE FEDERATION OF LAW SOCIETIES OF CANADA (Pursuant to Rule 42 of the Rules ofthe Supreme Court of Canada) 11

Counsel for the Respondent Agent for the Respondent HUNTER LITIGATION CHAMBERS BLAKE, CASSELS & GRAYDON LLP 2100 - 1040 West Georgia Street 340 Albert, Suite 1750 Vancouver, BC V6E 4H1 Constitution Square, Tower 3 Tel: (604) 891-2400 Ottawa ON K1R 7Y6 Fax: (604) 647-4554 Tel: (613) 788-2200 Email: [email protected] Fax: (613) 788-2247 JOHN J.L. HUNTER, Q.C. E-mail: [email protected] NANCY K. BROOKS BLAKE, CASSELS & GRAYDON LLP 2600- 595 Burrard Street Vancouver, BC V7X 1L3 Tel: (604) 631-4220 Fax: (604) 631-3309 Email: [email protected] ROY W. MILLEN

Counsel for the Appellant DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 2323-234 Wellington Street, East Tower Ottawa, ON K1A OH8 Tel: (613) 941-2351 Fax: (613) 954-1920 christopher .rupar@justice. gc.ca CHRISTOPHER RUPAR JAN BRONGERS BJWRAY

Counsel for the Intervener Agent for the Intervener Law Society of British Columbia Law Society of British Columbia MCCARTHY TETRAULT LLP BORDEN LADNER GERVAIS LLP Suite 1300, 777 Dunsmuir Street World Exchange Plaza Vancouver, BC V7Y 1K2 100 Queen Street, Suite 11 00 Tel: (604) 643-5983 Ottawa, ON K1P 1J9 Fax: (604) 622-5614 Tel: (613) 787-3562 Email: [email protected] Fax: (613) 230-8842 LEONARD T. DOUST, Q.C. Email: [email protected] MICHAEL A. FEDER NADIA EFFENDI 111

Counsel for the Intervener Agent for the Intervener Canadian Bar Association Canadian Bar Association LAWSON LUNDELL LLP NOEL ET ASSOCIES 1600 - 925 West Georgia Street 111 Champlain St. Vancouver, BC V6C 3L2 Gatineau, PQ J8X 3R1 Tel: (604) 685-3456 Tel: (819) 771-7393 Fax: (604) 669-1620 Fax: (819) 771-5397 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] CRAIG A.B. FERRIS PIERRE LANDRY LAURA L. BEVAN

Counsel for the Intervener Agent for the Intervener Barreau du Quebec et Chambre des Notaires Barreau du Quebec et Chambre des du Quebec Notaires du Quebec LAVERY, DE BILLY, s.e.n.c.r.l. LAVERY, DE BILLY, s.e.n.c.r.l. 1, Place Ville Marie, bureau 4000 360, rue Albert, bureau 1810 Montreal, QB H3B 4M4 Ottawa, ON K1R 7X7 Tel: (514) 877-2913 Tel: (613) 594-4936 (514) 877-2981 Fax: (613) 594-8783 Fax: (514) 871-8977 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] PAULLEPSOE [email protected] RAYMONE DORAY, Ad.E LOIC BERDNIKOFF

Counsel for the Intervener Agent for the Intervener Criminal Lawyers' Association Criminal Lawyers' Association STOCKWOODS LLP GOWLINGS LLP TD Centre, TD North tower 160 Elgin Street, Suite 2600 77 King Street West, Suite 4130 Ottawa, ON K1P 1C3 Toronto, ON M5K 1H1 Tel: (613) 786-0212 Tel: (416) 593-7200 Fax: (613) 788-3500 Fax: (416) 593-9345 Email: ed. [email protected] Email: [email protected] GUY REGIMBALD [email protected] MICHAEL FAIRBURN JUSTIN SAFAUEMO lV

Counsel for the Intervener Agent for the Intervener Canadian Civil Liberties Association Canadian Civil Liberties Association OSLER, HOSKIN & HARCOURT LLP OSLER, HOSKIN & HARCOURT LLP PO Box 50, 1900 - 340 Albert Street 1 First Canadian Place Ottawa, ON K1R 7Y6 Toronto, ON M5X 1B8 Tel: (613) 235-7234 Tel: (416) 862-6764 Fax: (613) 235-2867 Fax: ( 416) 862-6666 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] PATRICIAJ. WILSON MAHMUD JAMAL W. DAVID RANKIN PIERRE-ALEXANDRE HENRI

Counsel for the Intervener Agent for the Intervener The Advocates' Society The Advocates' Society STERN LANDESMAN CLARK LLP GOWLING LAFLEUR HENDERSON Suite 1724, 390 Bay Street LLP Toronto, ON M5H 2Y2 160 Elgin Street, Suite 2600 Tel: (416) 869-3422 Ottawa, ON K1P 1C3 Fax: (416) 869-3449 Tel: (613) 786-0139 Email: [email protected] (613) 786-8695 PAUL D. STERN Fax: (613) 788-3433 (613) 788-3509 PALIARE ROLAND ROSENBERG Email: [email protected] ROTHSTEIN LLP d.lynne. [email protected] 155 Wellington Street West, 35th Floor HENRYS. BROWN, Q.C. Toronto, ON M5V 3H1 D. LYNNE WATT Tel: (416) 646-4314 Fax: (416) 646-4301 Email: [email protected] ROBERT A. CENTA TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I STATEMENT OF FACTS ...... 1 A. Introduction ...... 1 B. The purpose of subjecting lawyers to the regime ...... 2 C. Lawyers' Proposed Obligations under the Regime ...... 4 D. FINTRAC's warrantless search and seizure powers ...... 5 E. Self-Regulation ofthe Legal Profession ...... 8 F. The Domestic and international context ...... 10 G. Prior Proceedings Regarding the Regime ...... 10 H. The Judgments below ...... 11 PART II QUESTIONS IN ISSUE ...... 15

PART III ARGUMENT ...... 16 A. Standard of review ...... 16 B. Section 7 ofthe Charter ...... 17 (1) Deprivation of Liberty ...... 17 (2) Independence of the Bar is a Principle of Fundamental Justice ...... 19 (3) Solicitor-Client Privilege is a Principle of Fundamental Justice ...... 27 (4) The Regime Does Not Conform with the Principles of Fundamental Justice ...... 33 C. The regime violates section 8 of the Charter ...... 36 D. The violations cannot be justified under section 1 ...... 38 PART IV COSTS ...... 41 PART V ORDER SOUGHT ...... 41 PART VI LIST OF AUTHORITIES ...... 42 PART VII LEGISLATION ...... 48 PART I STATEMENT OF FACTS

A. INTRODUCTION

1. It is fundamental to the system of justice in Canada that lawyers cannot be required to function as state agents, acting against their clients' interests, and their offices cannot be turned into archives for the use of the prosecution against their clients. Yet that is precisely the purpose and effect of the inclusion oflawyers1 in the federal legislative regime ("Regime") at issue in this appeal. The Regime would require lawyers, on pain of imprisonment, to create and retain paper trails about their clients that would be available to law enforcement agents for purposes of investigating and prosecuting clients.

2. The Regime violates numerous key principles regarding the role of lawyers in the proper administration of justice, which this Court has confirmed over the past 35 years:

(a) An independent bar is essential to a modem democratic society, and to the administration ofjustice in Canada;

(b) An independent bar requires that lawyers are free from state interference with the delivery of legal services to clients;

(c) Clients must be secure in the knowledge that none of the information they disclose to their counsel in order to obtain legal advice will be used against them or revealed without their consent;

(d) Disclosure of such information is presumed to be prejudicial and must be avoided in all but exceptional circumstances; and

(e) The maintenance of these values is essential to the preservation of public confidence in the administration of justice.

3. All courts to date which have reviewed the imposition of this Regime on lawyers have unanimously agreed that the incursion into the solicitor-client relationship posed by the Regime is unprecedented and unconstitutional. This Court should uphold the decisions of the courts below, and dismiss the appeal.

1 In this factum, "lawyers" and "legal counsel" are used interchangeably, and refer to the "legal counsel" defined in the Act: in Quebec, advocates and notaries, and in other provinces, barristers and solicitors. See Appellant's Factum ("AF") tab 4 p. 2. -2-

B. THE PURPOSE OF SUBJECTING LAWYERS TO THE REGIME

4. The purpose of the Regime, and its imposition on lawyers, is very significant to this appeal: it is to conscript lawyers to assist police with the detection, investigation and prosecution of crime. This purpose is demonstrated by the text of the legislation itself, and confirmed by the facts found by the learned Chambers Judge on the extensive evidence filed by the parties?

5. The legislation is entitled "An Act to facilitate combatting the laundering of proceeds of crime and combatting the financing of terrorist activities, to establish the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada and to amend and repeal certain Acts in consequence", in 3 short, the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act (the "Act") • The Regime is comprised of the Act and the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Regulations, SOR/2002-184 ("Regulations")\ both of which have been amended numerous times since the original introduction of the Act in 2000.

6. The object ofthe Regime is set out ins. 3 of the Act. It includes:

(a) to implement specific measures to detect and deter money laundering and the financing of terrorist activities and to facilitate the investigation and prosecution of money laundering offences and terrorist activity financing offences, including

(i) establishing record keeping and client identification requirements for financial service providers and other persons or .... professions ...

(b) to respond to the threat posed by organized crime by providing law enforcement officials with the information they need to deprive criminals of the proceeds of their criminal activities ....

7. When the draft legislation was introduced into Parliament, the Honourable Jim Peterson stated for the Minister of Finance that it was focused on combatting crime and its proceeds. 5 The Honourable Roy Cullen, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance, stated further:

We must bring our investigative methods up to date to fight against today' s money laundering techniques. We need centralized and automated systems to discover the links

2 Reasons for Judgment of Madam Justice Gerow ("BCSC Reasons") at paras. 9, 14, 75, 111-112, 118-120, 136, 142, Appellant's Record ("AR") vol. I pp. 6-7,26, 34-37,40-42. 3 AFtab4. 4 AF tab 7. 5 Lalonde Affidavit #1, Exhibit A, AR vol. LV p. 75. - 3-

between dubious financial operations and the movement of illicit funds, and to ensure their follow-up. This is exactly what Bill C-22 does. 6

8. A December 2007 press release issued by the Minister of Finance specifically addressing the inclusion of lawyers within the Regime was to similar effect. 7

9. The policy concerns motivating the Regime were explained at length by Ms. Rachel Grasham, the Attorney General's lead affiant in these proceedings. Ms. Grasham is the Chief of Financial Crimes Domestic, Financial Sector Division, Financial Sector Policy Branch at the Department of Finance. Her first affidavit comprises a Brandeis brief with extensive Hansard excerpts and other material, filling ten Appeal Record volumes. Her second affidavit is 50 pages plus exhibits. She stated that her second affidavit "explains the basic policy rationales that underpin the provisions of the Legislation that are the subject of the Petition."8 Ms. Grasham addressed the "specific policy rationale" for imposing record-keeping requirements (detailed below) on lawyers, as follows:

42. Requiring financial institutions and intermediaries to keep records of financial transactions ensures that information about these transactions is available to them and, in appropriate circumstances, law enforcement. Client identification records may assist law enforcement in investigating and prosecuting money launderers, and may also help detect the path that illicit funds have taken through the financial system ....

44. Lawyers often have specific knowledge of their clients' activities and the circumstances surrounding the transaction in question and are thus able to provide relevant and detailed record keeping that, in the first instance, may deter illicit transactions and, failing that, may help establish a paper trail with respect to illicit funds. 9

10. Accordingly, the basis for requiring legal counsel to record client information is to create a "paper trail" of lawyers' "specific knowledge of their clients' activities", which will "assist law enforcement in investigating and prosecuting" crime. The Appellant emphasized this purpose in his submissions before the Chambers Judge, 10 and has done so again in his factum. 11

6 Lalonde Affidavit #1, Exhibit A, AR vol. LV p. 81; Grasham Affidavit #1, Exhibit A, AR vol. XLVIII p. 147. 7 Grasham Affidavit # 1, Exhibit A, AR vol. XLVIII p. 14 7. 8 Grasham Affidavit #2, para. 9, AR vol. LIV p. 4; BCSC Reasons paras. 118-119, AR vol. I pp. 36-37; BCCA Reasons paras. 91-92, AR vol. I p. 91. 9 Grasham Affidavit #2, paras. 37, 42, 44, AR vol. LIV pp. 11-13. 10 BCSC Reasons paras. 111-112, AR vol. I pp. 34-35. 11 AF paras. 17, 129, pp. 5, 38. -4-

11. Having reviewed the extensive Brandeis brief and other evidence adduced by the Attorney General, as well as the legislation itself and the parties' submissions, the Chambers Judge concluded on this point as follows:

It is apparent that the underlying purpose of the record keeping and record retention provisions of the Regime, as it applies to lawyers and legal firms, is to advance the criminal law interest of deterring, detecting, investigating and prosecuting crimes committed by lawyers' clients by having lawyers create a paper trail that can be used to prosecute their clients. 12

12. The Court of Appeal agreed:

[The Chambers Judge] was also correct in finding that the Regime imposes conditions of receiving legal advice, which include, in the case of a financial transaction in excess of $3,000, that clients provide information to the lawyer that the government may wish to access later in the course of carrying out the objectives of the Regime, as set out ins. 3 of the Act. 13

C. LAWYERS' PROPOSED OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE REGIME

13. The relevant legislative provisions are set out at paras. 44-47 and 121-139 of the BCSC Reasons, and paras. 26-34 of the BCCA Reasons. In this section we outline the key provisions.

14. Section 6 of the Act requires regulated persons and entities (in this case, legal counsel and legal firms by virtue of ss. 5(i) and G) of the Act, and s. 33.3 of the Regulations) to keep prescribed records. These records are detailed in the Regulations, summarized below.

15. Section 6.1 of the Act requires regulated persons and entities to verify the identities of persons and entities (in this case, primarily but not exclusively clients) in the circumstances prescribed by regulation.

16. Section 9.6 of the Act requires regulated persons and entities to implement a program to ensure their compliance with the legislated obligations.

17. The Regulations set out lawyers' specific obligations, primarily in ss. 1, 11.1, 33.3- 33.5, 59.4, and 64-70. The basic obligation is to create a "receipt of funds record" in respect of every receipt of $3,000 or more for a client transaction, except where the funds are received for professional fees, disbursements, expenses or bail. The record must include:

12 BCSC Reasons para. 142; see also paras. 111-112, 118-119, 141, AR vol. I pp. 34-37,42. 13 BCCA Reasons para. 81; see also paras. 88-94, AR vol. I pp. 88, 90-92. - 5 -

(a) the payor's name, address, date ofbirth and business or occupation;

(b) transaction date, amount, currency, and how the funds were received;

(d) most importantly, the ''purpose and details of the transaction, including other persons or entities involved and the type and form ofthe transaction". 14

18. Where a receipt of funds record is required, lawyers must also use specified measures to ascertain their clients' identities. In respect of a client which is a corporation or other entity, lawyers must obtain the name and occupation of all directors, and the name, address and occupation of all persons who directly or indirectly own or control 25% or more of the corporatiOn. ' s s h ares. 15

19. The Appellant places some emphasis on s. 11 of the Act, which provides that nothing in the Act "requires a legal counsel to disclose any communication that is subject to solicitor-client privilege." However, the Regime offers no protection from lawyers' essential obligation to record confidential and privileged information about clients for purposes of future use by law enforcement officials. 16

20. Sections 68-70 of the Regulations require regulated persons and entities to retain the required records for five years for examination by FINTRAC upon demand.

21. Section 74 of the Act provides that lawyers may be subject to imprisonment for failing to comply with their obligations thereunder.

D. FINTRAC'S WARRANTLESS SEARCH AND SEIZURE POWERS

22. FINTRAC has broad authority to search lawyers' offices, seize any document or other information it deems relevant to the Regime, and disclose it to domestic and foreign authorities. 17 Subsection 62(1) of the Act authorizes FINTRAC to "examine the records and inquire into the business and affairs" of any lawyer, by entry into the lawyer's office at any time without a warrant (other than a dwelling, for which a warrant is required under s. 63). When searching the

14 Emphasis added. Regulations, ss. 1 ("receipt of funds record"), 33.3 - 33.4, AF tab 7 pp. 8, 6-37. See BCSC Reasons paras. 120-135, AR vol. I pp. 37-40; BCCA Reasons para. 34, AR vol. I pp. 75-76. 15 Regulations, ss. 11.1, 59.4, 64, AFtab 7 pp. 17-18,66-67,75-79. 16 BCSC Reasons para. 137, AR vol. I p. 41; BCCA Reasons para. 74, AR vol. I p. 86. 17 BCSC Reasons paras. 136- 139, AR vol. I pp. 40-42; BCCA Reasons paras. 31-33, AR vol. I p. 75. - 6- lawyer's office, FINTRAC can "use or cause to be used any computer system or data processing system in the premises to examine any data contained in or available to the system", and "reproduce any record, or cause it to be reproduced from the data".

23. While the Appellant states at para. 107 of his factum that FINTRAC is only "interested in reviewing" lawyers' business records, the Act has no such limitations. It empowers FINTRAC, without a warrant, to inquire into a lawyer's business and affairs, and examine and reproduce any record or data, including any data available on or to any computer at the lawyer's premises. Given the enormous volumes of information now contained on computer networks, this search power is vast indeed.

24. Section 62(2) of the Act provides that the lawyer in charge of the office "and every person found there" shall give FINTRAC's search agents "all reasonable assistance" and "furnish them with any information ... that they may reasonably require".

25. Section 63.1 of the Act authorizes FINTRAC to issue a notice requiring a lawyer to produce "any document or information relevant to the administration of Part 1 in the form of electronic data, a printout or other intelligible output".

26. Section 64 of the Act provides a procedure by which a lawyer may claim privilege over a document that FINTRAC is about to examine or copy. Section 64 is similar to s. 232 of the Income Tax Act and s. 488.1 of the Criminal Code, both of which have been found unconstitutional. 18 In 2005, the Department of Finance acknowledged that s. 64 of the Act does not conform with the principles set out in Lavallee, and proposed to amend the Act accordingly. 19 Despite numerous other amendments of the Act since then, s. 64 has not been amended. The Appellant has offered no explanation for this fact.

27. Subsection 55(3) and 55.1 of the Act require FINTRAC to disclose to the appropriate police force, CSIS and others, "designated information" if FINTRAC has reasonable grounds to suspect it would be relevant to investigating or prosecuting a money laundering offence or a terrorist activity financing offence, or a threat to the security of Canada. "Designated

18 Canada (Procureur general) c. Chambre des notaires du Quebec, 2014 QCCA 552, Respondent's Authorities ("RA") vol. I tab 13; Lavallee, Racket & Heintz v. Canada (Attorney General), 2002 SCC 61, [2002] 3 S.C.R. 209, RA vol. II tab 34; BCSC Reasons para. 138, AR vol. I p. 41. 19 Varro Affidavit, para. 11 and Exhibit "C", AR vol. II pp. 3, 161. - 7 - information" is very broadly defined, 20 and includes the name, date of birth, contact information, and any criminal record of any person involved in a transaction or attempted transaction. It also includes "relationships suspected by the Centre [FINTRAC] on reasonable grounds to exist between any persons", and "indicators of a money laundering offence or a terrorist activity financing offence related to the transaction, attempted transaction, importation or exportation"?1

28. In fiscal year 2008-2009, FINTRAC disclosed "designated information" in 556 cases.22

29. The Regime does not limit the use by law enforcement of information disclosed pursuant toss. 55(3), including for the incrimination of clients for offences unrelated to the Regime.23

30. Sections 60 and 60.1 ofthe Act empower the Attorney General and the Director ofCSIS, respectively, to make an ex parte application to court for an order that FINTRAC disclose information for purposes of an investigation. The target of the investigation is not notified of the application or entitled to attend the hearing of it.

31. Section 65 of the Act empowers FINTRAC to disclose to law enforcement agencies "any information of which it becomes aware" pursuant to its search powers, and that it suspects on reasonable grounds is evidence of a contravention of Part 1 of the Act. Bill C-31, recently introduced into Parliament, would broaden this provision such that FINTRAC could disclose information which it "suspects on reasonable grounds would be relevant to investigating or prosecuting an offence under this Act". 24

32. Section 65(3) formerly had no restriction on the use by law enforcement of information disclosed to it pursuant to s. 65(1 ). Such use is now limited to enforcing compliance with Part 1 of the Act, but there remains no statutory derivative use immunity.25

33. Section 65.1 of the Act empowers FINTRAC to disclose information to foreign state agencies, over which Canadian courts have no control.

20 Although arguably it would not include material obtained pursuant toss. 62-63.1 searches: sees. 57 of the Act. 21 Ss. 55(7) and 55.1(3) of the Act, AF tab 4 pp. 37-40, and s. 13 of the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Suspicious Transaction Reporting Regulations, SOR/2001-317: see Donovan Affidavit, paras. 22-32, AR vol. XXVIII pp. 192-199. 22 Donovan Affidavit, para. 33, AR vol. XXVIII p. 199. 23 See also BCSC Reasons paras. 139-143, AR vol. I pp. 41-43. 24 Bill C-31, Second Session, Forty-first Parliament, 62-63 Elizabeth II, 2013-2014, s. 287. 25 See BCCA Reasons paras. 95-99, AR vol. I pp. 92-93. - 8 -

34. Bill C-31 would also amend the Act by adding s. 68.1, pursuant to which FINTRAC could file documents with the court in any action, suit or other legal proceedings brought or taken under the Act.26 The documents which could be filed include information obtained in the administration or enforcement of Part 3 of the Act,27 which includes ss. 62-64. The Bill contains no limitation on the use of such material once it has been filed in court.

E. SELF -REGULATION OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION

35. The Respondent is the national coordinating body of the 14 provincial and territorial governing bodies of the legal profession in Canada. Its member law societies are charged with the responsibility of regulating Canada's 95,000 lawyers and 3,500 Quebec notaries in the public interest. 28

36. The law societies of Canada, in coordination with the Respondent, have undertaken two key initiatives. First, in 2004 law societies adopted a "No Cash Rule" which prohibits lawyers from receiving $7,500 or more in cash in any one matter, subject to certain exceptions.29 The No Cash Rule is intended to augment longstanding law society rules prohibiting lawyers from engaging in illegal activities by preventing lawyers from being unwittingly involved in money laundering and other criminal schemes, while maintaining the essential principles underlying the solicitor-client relationship.

37. Second, since 2008 Canadian law societies have implemented rules on client identification and verification (the "Client ID Rule"). Members of the legal profession must identify all clients who retain them to provide legal services, by recording basic information such as clients' names, addresses and telephone numbers. In addition, when legal counsel provide legal services in respect of the receipt, payment or transfer of funds, they must verify their clients' identities by reference to independent source documents such as a driver's licence, birth certificate, passport or other government-issued identification.30 The Client ID Rule requires members of the legal profession to maintain all information needed to serve clients, but not

26 Bill C-31, Second Session, Forty-first Parliament, 62-63 Elizabeth II, 2013-2014, s. 291. 27 Pursuant to s. 55(1)(f) ofthe Act. 28 BCSC Reasons paras. 1, 6, AR vol. I pp. 4-5; BCCA Reasons para. 12, AR vol. I p. 69. See e.g. Legal Profession Act, S.B.C. 1998, c. 9, s. 3. 29 BCSC Reasons paras. 21-23, AR vol. I pp. 8-9; BCCA Reasons para. 19, AR vol. I p. 71; F. Wilson Affidavit #3, AR vol. VIII. 30 BCSC Reasons paras. 24-27, AR vol. I pp. 9-10; BCCA Reasons para. 22, AR vol. I p. 72; F. Wilson Affidavit #1, AR vols. IV-V. - 9- information that serves only to provide potential evidence against the clients m future investigations or prosecutions by state authorities.

38. Collectively, the No Cash and Client ID rules refute the suggestion at paras. 8 and 26 of the Appellant's factum that individuals can do banking through lawyers without revealing their identities. A lawyer can only receive funds for material transactions ($7,500 or more) via a financial institution. Regardless of the source of funds, lawyers must perform strict due diligence measures on clients when assisting them with transactions.

39. In addition to the No Cash and Client ID rules, law societies have extensive rules protecting and governing the confidentiality of the solicitor-client relationship.31

40. The Chambers Judge found that "law societies undertake an extensive range of activities to promote and ensure compliance with their rules, including education, annual self-reporting, audits and investigations."32 Non-compliance with law society rules is addressed via disciplinary processes, which can result in a reprimand, fine, suspension and I or disbarment. The Chambers Judge found that "There have been very few breaches of the No Cash Rule" and "no reported disciplinary proceedings involving a breach of the Client ID Rule". 33

41. In paras. 28 and 128 of his factum, the Appellant questions the sufficiency of law society compliance measures. These allegations were raised before and rejected by both courts below. First, Ms. Grasham acknowledged that for purposes of enforcement, law societies have a greater ability to understand the legal profession and its conduct.34 Second, over a five-year period FINTRAC only examined 900 of 75,000 entities subject to the Regime, whereas law societies audit most if not all of their members during that period.35 Third, FINTRAC has indicated its satisfaction with law societies' ability to ensure their members' compliance with the rules. If the Regime is imposed on lawyers, FINTRAC may seek to enter into an arrangement with law

31 F. Wilson Affidavit #2, AR vols. V-VIII, e.g. vol. V pp. 54-56, 114-125, 162-165. 32 BCSC Reasons para. 186, and paras. 29-36,206, AR vol. I pp. 10-12, 51-52, 55; BCCA Reasons para. 23, AR vol. Ip. 72. 33 BCSC Reasons para. 34, AR vol. I p. 11. 34 Transcript ofGrasham Examination, Poissant Affidavit, Exhibit A pp. 29, 57, AR vol. LXV pp. 181,209. 35 BCSC Reasons para. 206, AR vol. I p. 55; F. Wilson Affidavit #4, para. 21 and Ex. B, AR vol. VIII p. 183 and vol. IXp. 6. - 10- societies whereby they would monitor lawyers' compliance with the Regime (although given their opposition to the Regime the law societies have not agreed to this proposal)?6

F. THE DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT

42. The Respondent agrees that money laundering and terrorist financing are legitimate issues for the government to address, as long as the measures chosen are constitutionally sound. That said, the Chambers Judge's determinations of fact belie the Appellant's submissions at paras. 7-9 of his factum concerning lawyers' involvement in money laundering in Canada. The Chambers Judge concluded that, notwithstanding lawyers' exemption from the Regime, "there is no evidence that lawyers have become 'the most sought after resource by criminal organizations' to launder proceeds of crime, as suggested in a 2003 report" prepared by one of the Appellant's affiants.37 Nor has the Appellant proffered any evidence that Canadian lawyers have been involved in terrorist financing.

43. Similarly, the Appellant's allegations at paras. 6, 10 and 26 of his factum regarding the international context are contrary to the Chambers Judge's findings of fact. First, in response to the suggestion that Canada may face international criticism for having a "gap" in its anti-money laundering system, the Chambers Judge concluded "The evidence does not establish that Canada's international stature will be affected in any significant way by the continuation of the status quo, whereby lawyers are subject to law society rules but not to the Regime."38 Second, in response to the Appellant's suggestion that Canada's allies have adopted similar regimes, the Chambers Judge reviewed the evidence and concluded that the United States and Australia have not done so.39 Finally, numerous international instruments emphasize the importance of the independence of the bar, as noted below.

G. PRIOR PROCEEDINGS REGARDING THE REGIME

44. Lawyers were first made subject to the Act in 2001, when they were required to report to FINTRAC "suspicious transactions" involving their clients (transactions for which there are reasonable grounds to suspect that they relate to a money laundering offence), pursuant to s. 7 of

36 BCSC Reasons paras. 206-207, AR vol. I pp. 55-56; BCCA Reasons paras. 147-153, AR vol. I pp. 104-106; Donovan Affidavit, paras. 99-100, AR vol. XXVIII pp. 214-215. 37 BCSC Reasons para. 219, AR vol. I pp. 58-59. 38 BCSC Reasons para. 184, AR vol. I p. 51. 39 BCSC Reasons paras. 180-183, 210-212, AR vol. I pp. 50-51, 56-57; BCCA Reasons para. 8, AR vol. I p. 68; Gottridge Affidavit, para. 10, AR vol. XVIII p. 110; Stinebower Affidavit, paras. 15-16, AR vol. IX p. 11. - 11 - the Act. The Respondent and the Law Society of British Columbia brought proceedings challenging the constitutionality of those provisions on the day they came into force. The B.C. Supreme Court issued a strong judgment upholding the challenge, finding that the provisions amounted to "an unprecedented intrusion into the traditional solicitor-client relationship". The court granted an interlocutory exemption for legal counsel and legal firms from the Act, pending a full hearing of the merits ofthe constitutional challenge.40

45. Similar orders were issued in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario, and Nova Scotia.41 In 2002, the Attorney General agreed with the Respondent that the present proceedings should serve as a test case in respect of the relevant constitutional issues.42 The parties agreed to "take all reasonable measures to ensure that a full and complete record is before the court" for the purpose of the proceedings.43

46. The government subsequently repealed the provisions imposing reporting requirements on lawyers. However, the government then announced its intention to impose on lawyers the provisions which are the subject of the present appeal. In accordance with the 2002 agreement among the parties, these proceedings were revived to determine the constitutionality of the impugned provisions of the Regime. 44

H. THE JUDGMENTS BELOW

4 7. A significant volume of material was considered by the Chambers Judge: 51 affidavits (plus exhibits) comprising roughly 15,000 pages, lengthy written arguments (207 pages by the Attorney General alone), approximately 150 lengthy authorities, and oral submissions over six days. The Reasons for Judgment of the Chambers Judge comprise 231 paragraphs. Combined with the parties' agreement to ensure a full and complete record before the court, this refutes the

40 BCSC Reasons paras. 16-18, AR vol. I pp. 7-8; BCCA Reasons paras. 14-17, AR vol. I pp. 70-71; Law Society of British Columbia v. Canada (Attorney General), 2001 BCSC 1593, 98 B.C.L.R. (3d) 282 at para. 108, RA vol. II tab 35. 41 Law Society ofBritish Columbia v. Canada (Attorney General), 2002 BCCA 49, 98 B.C.L.R. (3d) 310, RA vol. II tab 36; Federation ofLaw Societies ofCanada v. Canada (Attorney General), [2001] A.J. No. 1697 (Q.B.), RA vol. I tab 23;Federation ofLaw Societies of Canada v. Canada (Attorney General, 2002 SKQB 153,218 Sask. R. 193, RA vol. I tab 25;Federation ofLaw Societies of Canada v. Canada (Attorney General) (2002), 57 O.R. (3d) 383 (S.C.J.), RA vol. I tab 22;Federation ofLaw Societies of Canada v. Canada (Attorney General), 2002 NSSC 95, 203 N.S.R. (2d) 53, RA vol. I tab 24. 42 BCSC Reasons para. 19, AR vol. I p. 8. 43 Grasham Affidavit #2, Exhibit E, AR vol. LV p. 49. 44 BCCA Reasons paras. 3-4, AR vol. I p. 67. - 12-

Appellant's suggestions at paras. 45-47 and 109 of his factum concerning a supposedly weak evidentiary foundation for the decisions below.45

48. The Chambers Judge focused on s. 7 of the Charter, finding at para. 91 that the threat of imprisonment for lawyers pursuant to s. 74 of the Act "constitutes a clear deprivation of liberty". "The whole purpose of the Regime", she found at para. 136, "is criminal in nature". The specific purpose of imposing the Regime on lawyers is to require them to "collect information from their clients to establish a paper trail for law enforcement agencies to access. "46 "That underlying purpose", she held at para. 142, "clearly puts clients' liberty interests at stake".

49. Having canvassed the authorities establishing solicitor-client privilege as a principle of fundamental justice, the Chambers Judge concluded at para. 144 that the recording and retention obligations violates. 7 ofthe Charter:

imposing the recording and related obligations contained in Part 1 of the Act on legal counsel and legal firms would result in having lawyers' offices turned into archives for the use of the prosecution, and would violate the principles of fundamental justice insofar as it erodes the solicitor-client privilege.

50. The Chambers Judge did not consider ss. 62-64 of the Act under s. 8 of the Charter, given that ss. 62-64 would not apply absent the recording and retention obligations.47

51. Turning to s. 1 of the Charter, the Chambers Judge found that while the impugned provisions have a pressing and substantial objective- to address money laundering and terrorist financing - the Regime is not a proportionate response. The Chambers Judge reviewed at length and rejected the Attorney General's argument (repeated on appeal) that the law society rules are no less intrusive upon the solicitor-client relationship. While law societies may access solicitor client information in pursuit of their regulatory authority, there are "no instances where government agencies have been permitted to impose a requirement as a condition of receiving legal advice that clients provide information to the lawyer that the government may wish to access later."48 Having canvassed the applicable authorities on constitutional remedies, she

45 BCSC Reasons paras. 62-76, AR vol. I pp. 22-26; BCCA Reasons paras. 57-59, AR vol. I pp. 81-82. 46 BCSC Reasons para. 112, AR vol. I pp. 34-35. 47 BCSC Reasons paras. 145-146, AR vol. I p. 43. 48 BCSC Reasons at para. 202; see generally paras. 186-214, AR vol. I pp. 51-57. - 13- concluded that the appropriate remedy is to read down and sever various provisions of the Regime to make it inapplicable to legal counsel and legal firms. 49

52. The Court of Appeal largely agreed with the conclusions of the Chambers Judge. Justice Hinkson (now C.J.S.C.), writing for himself, Finch C.J.B.C and Neilson J.A., held that the Regime interferes to an unacceptable degree with the independence of the bar, a principle of fundamental justice. Having reviewed the legislation, Hinkson J.A. rejected the Appellant's argument (repeated at paras. 50-62 of his factum) that the legislation only imposes obligations on lawyers acting as "financial intermediaries". As a matter of statutory interpretation, the Regime "imposes a condition for providing legal advice on any lawyer described in s. 33.3 of the Regulations, that is, the lawyer must comply with Part 1 of the Act." Further, the Regime requires lawyers "to record client information which is prima facie the subject of solicitor-client confidentiality", and retain it "in such a way that it can potentially be accessed by the government under the search and seizure provisions of the Act. "50

53. This conclusion grounded the majority's determination that the liberty of clients (as well as lawyers) is jeopardized by the Regime: "confidential client information which is not found to be privileged" has no protection under the Regime. "In my opinion, much of this information could be directly relevant to the prosecution of criminal charges against a client". This finding is consistent with the purpose of subjecting lawyers to the Regime: to gain access to a paper trail recording lawyers' "specific knowledge of their clients' activities and the circumstances surrounding the transaction in question". Even if the sole purpose ofthe Regime was deterrence, that purpose could not be achieved if there was no "potential for prosecution or imprisonment of clients based on or triggered by the information that must be collected from them under the Regime."51

54. Justice Hinkson reviewed the principles of fundamental justice, including solicitor-client privilege, the independence of the bar and the duty of loyalty. He found that the obligation to collect, record and disclose confidential client information "will tum at least some lawyers into agents of the state", violating the independence of the bar and hence s. 7 of the Charter. 52

49 BCSC Reasons at paras. 215-226, AR vol. I pp. 57-60. 50 BCCA Reasons at paras. 66, 69, 71, 74, AR vol. I pp. 84-86; see also BCSC Reasons para. 135, AR vol. I p. 40. 51 BCCA Reasons at paras. 88, 92-94, AR vol. I pp. 90-92. 52 BCCA Reasons paras. 122-124, AR vol. I p. 99. - 14-

55. Applying the Oakes test, the majority rejected the Appellant's arguments (raised again at paras. 128-130 of his factum) that the Regime is minimally impairing because the No Cash and Client ID rules are either (i) less effective than the Regime, or (ii) no less intrusive into the solicitor-client relationship. As for allegation (i), Hinkson J.A. agreed with the Chambers Judge's conclusion on the evidence that:

to the extent that one of the purposes of the Regime is to ensure adequate client identification and record-keeping by professionals, those objectives are already being met in respect of the legal profession by virtue of the law societies' regulation of their 3 members. 5

56. As for the alternative allegation (ii), Hinkson J.A. agreed with the Chambers Judge that the mandate of the law societies is not to detect, deter, investigate and prosecute crimes, as is the stated object of the Act. Rather, the law societies' mandate and commitment is to regulate the practice of law in the public interest. Law societies' access to solicitor-client information is consistent with this mandate. Accordingly, the majority agreed with the Chambers Judge that "the regulation of lawyers by the law societies minimally impairs the rights of clients and lawyers while providing an effective and constitutional anti-money laundering and terrorist . . ,54 fimancmg regime.

57. Writing for himself and Garson J.A., Frankel J.A. agreed with all of the majority's conclusions other than with respect to the affected liberty interests. He would have held that only the liberty of lawyers is jeopardized by the Regime. In any event, he agreed with the majority and the Chambers Judge that the relevant provisions of the Regime fail to conform with the principles of fundamental justice and therefore must be severed and read down. 55

53 BCSC Reasons para. 187, AR vol. I p. 52; BCCA Reasons paras. 147-154, AR vol. I pp. 104-106. 54 BCCA Reasons para. 142; see paras. 136-146, AR vol. I pp. 102-104. 55 BCCA Reasons para. 163, AR vol. I p. 109. - 15-

PART II QUESTIONS IN ISSUE

58. The Respondent's positions with respect to the Constitutional Questions stated by the Chief Justice are as follows:

1. Sections 5(i) and G), 62, 63, 63.1 and 64 of the Act infringe s. 7 of the Charter by jeopardizing lawyers' and clients' liberty interests in a manner that does not conform with the principles of the independence of the bar and solicitor-client privilege.

2. The infringement is not justifiable because the evidence establishes that the Regime does not minimally impair the independence of the bar and solicitor-client privilege, particularly in light of the law societies' enactment and enforcement of the No Cash and Client ID rules, and is disproportionate.

3. Sections 11.1, 33.3 and 33.4 of the Regulations infringe s. 7 of the Charter by jeopardizing lawyers' and clients' liberty interests in a manner that does not conform with the principles ofthe independence of the bar and solicitor-client privilege.

4. The infringement is not justifiable because the evidence establishes that the Regime does not minimally impair the independence of the bar and solicitor-client privilege, particularly in light of the law societies' enactment and enforcement of the No Cash and Client ID rules, and is disproportionate.

5. Sections 5(i) and G), 62, 63, 63.1 and 64 of the Act infringe s. 8 of the Charter by authorizing warrantless and unreasonable searches oflawyers' offices and seizures of confidential solicitor-client information, with inadequate protections for solicitor client privilege.

6. The infringement is not justifiable because the evidence establishes that the Regime does not minimally impair solicitor-client privilege and clients' reasonable expectation of privacy in documents and information held by their legal counsel, particularly in light of the law societies' enactment and enforcement of the No Cash and Client ID rules, and is disproportionate.

7. Sections 11.1, 33.3 and 33.4 of the Regulations infringe s. 8 of the Charter by subjecting legal counsel and legal firms to the Regime, including FINTRAC's authority to undertake warrantless and unreasonable searches of lawyers' offices and seizures of solicitor-client confidential information, with inadequate protections for solicitor-client privilege.

8. The infringement is not justifiable because the evidence establishes that the Regime does not minimally impair solicitor-client privilege and clients' reasonable expectation of privacy in documents and information held by their legal counsel, particularly in light of the law societies' enactment and enforcement of the No Cash and Client ID rules, and is disproportionate. - 16-

PART III ARGUMENT

A. STANDARD OF REVIEW

59. The decisions of the courts below are founded on key evidentiary determinations made 6 by the Chambers Judge. Those findings deserve deference. 5 At paras. 49-53 of his factum, the Appellant argues that the Chambers Judge erred in justifying her legal analysis in part on the fact that requiring lawyers to create paper trails leading state agents to clients is an important policy motivating the subjection of lawyers to the Regime. (That said, the Appellant also admits and relies on this policy motivation at paras. 17 and 129 of his factum.) The Chambers Judge made this factual finding on the evidence offered by the Appellant, as well as the legislative text. The Court of Appeal agreed with the Chambers Judge's conclusions. There is no basis to interfere.

60. A second factual matter relates to the implementation and enforcement of the No Cash and Client ID rules, including in the context of FATF recommendations and FINTRAC's enforcement abilities. On this issue, the Respondent filed ten affidavits (filling over ten volumes of the Appeal Record) covering all Canadian law societies, as well as the efforts of the Federation of Law Societies itself. The Appellant filed at least five affidavits (filling approximately sixteen Appeal Record volumes) addressing the FATF and FINTRAC. The Chambers Judge reviewed this material and concluded that law societies' regulation of their members is effective, consistent with their mandate, and meets the relevant F ATF recommendation. The Court of Appeal agreed. 57

61. A third factual issue concerns the international context: (i) the extent to which other jurisdictions have imposed similar requirements on lawyers; and (ii) whether Canada's reputation could be put at risk by virtue of a continuation of the status quo, whereby lawyers are subject to law society rules, not the Regime. Evidence was filed by both parties from around the world. The Chambers Judge concluded that (i) some states have imposed similar measures while 8 others have not; and (ii) Canada's reputation is not at risk. 5

62. The Court of Appeal correctly held that the Chambers Judge's determination of the legal issues was based on her factual findings. Those findings of fact, or mixed fact and law, are

56 Hausen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235 at paras. 11, 28, 32, RA vol. II tab 31. 57 BCCA Reasons paras 141-142, 146-153, AR vol. I pp. 103-106. 58 BCSC Reasons paras. 182-187,210-212, AR vol. I pp. 51-52, 56-57. - 17- entitled to appellate deference, and must not be interfered with absent palpable and overriding error or an error of law. 59 This includes determinations based on legislative facts. 60 The Appellant does not allege any palpable or overriding errors in the Reasons of the Chambers Judge. This appeal, therefore, must proceed on the basis that the relevant facts have been found, and the legal issues arising from the Constitutional Questions must be determined by reference to those factual findings.

B. SECTION 7 OF THE CHARTER

(1) Deprivation of Liberty

63. The first issue under s. 7 is whether there is a deprivation of life, liberty or security of the person associated with the Regime. If so, the Regime must accord with the principles of fundamental justice. 61

64. In this case, lawyers' liberty interests are jeopardized by the Regime: if they do not comply with it, they can be imprisoned pursuant to s. 74 of the Act. The Appellant acknowledges this at paras. 43, 45 and 62 ofhis factum. The threat of imprisonment constitutes a deprivation of liberty, and is sufficient to move to the next stage of the s. 7 analysis. 62

65. The Appellant argues at paras. 44-62 of his factum that clients' liberty interests are not jeopardized by the Regime. There are numerous responses to this submission. First, it is contradicted by the factual findings made by the Chambers Judge and upheld by the Court of Appeal concerning the policy justification for the Regime. That policy is consistent with the objectives of the Act as set out ins. 3, which include "providing law enforcement officials with the information they need to deprive criminals of the proceeds of their criminal activities." While the Appellant argues at para. 53 of his factum that this is not the "predominant purpose of the specific impugned provisions", that is irrelevant; the issue is to identify the purposes of the Act, 63 and whether those purposes (or the effects of the Regime) violate s. 7. 64 The Regime targets lawyers because they have specific knowledge about their clients' affairs, which law

59 BCCA Reasons paras. 55-60, AR vol. I pp. 81-82. 6°Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford, 2013 SCC 72 at paras. 48-56, 154, RA vol. I tab 9. 61 R. v. D.B., 2008 SCC 25, [2008] 2 S.C.R. 3 at para. 37, RA vol. II tab 50; Canada (Prime Minister) v. Khadr, 2010 SCC 3, [2010] 1 S.C.R. 44 at paras. 12, 22, RA vol. I tab 12. 62 R. v. D.B., supra at para. 38, RA vol. II tab 50; Re B.C. Motor Vehicle Act, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 486 at 515-516, RA vol. III tab 65; R. v. Malmo-Levine, 2003 SCC 74, [2003] 3 S.C.R. 571 at paras. 84, 89 and 220, RA vol. III tab 58. 63 Wood v. Schaeffer, 2013 SCC 71 at para. 33, RA vol. IV tab 76. 64 Canada (Attorney General) v. Whaling, 2014 SCC 20 at para. 64, RA vol. I tab 11. - 18- enforcement agencies wish to have available for their access. 65 (The fact that government officials actively pursue legal counsel for information about clients is confirmed by the demands 66 made to Quebec notaries pursuant to the Income Tax Act. ) Hence both the purposes and effects of the Regime include jeopardizing clients' liberty interests.

66. Second, the Regime would have little value in combatting money laundering (as the Appellant admitted before the Court of Appeal) if lawyers' records were not available for use by police against clients. The Appellant suggests that the Regime is primarily aimed at prevention and deterrence. Even if that was so, as the Court of Appeal held, the Regime would have no deterrent value if potential money launderers did not believe their actions could be subject to scrutiny by law enforcement officials. 67

67. Third, the Appellant's submissions suggest that there needs to be a direct connection between the Regime and a threat to clients' liberty interests. This Court specifically rejected such an approach in Bedford, holding that the appropriate threshold is a "sufficient causal connection" between the law and the prejudice. This is a "flexible standard," "satisfied by a reasonable inference, drawn on a balance ofprobabilities".68 That standard is met here.

68. Finally on this point, whether the liberty interests at risk are those of lawyers or clients is irrelevant to the analysis of the principles of fundamental justice applicable to this case. The principles of fundamental justice apply whenever liberty interests are engaged.69 Neither the Appellant's factum nor the concurring reasons of Frankel J.A. suggests otherwise. This is because solicitor-client privilege and the independence of the bar depend on the relationship between solicitor and client. Imprisoning either party on account of its actions within the relationship must be carefully scrutinized for conformance with those principles. 70

69. Under the Regime, a lawyer could be imprisoned for refusing to act contrary to her ethical obligations and her client's interests, i.e. recording and retaining information for future use by the state against the client. The analogy would be a law that required lawyers, on pain of

65 Grasham Affidavit #2 para. 44, AR vol. LIV p. 13. 66 Canada (Procureur general) c. Chambre des notaires du Quebec, supra at para. 90, RA vol. I tab 13. 67 BCCA Reasons para. 94, AR vol. I p. 92. 68 Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford, supra at paras. 75-76, RA vol. I tab 9. 69 Charkaoui v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2007 SCC 9, [2007] 1 S.C.R. 350 at para. 18, RA vol. I tab 17. 70 See e.g. Canada (Attorney General) v. PHS Community Services Society, 2011 SCC 44, [2011] 3 S.C.R. 134 at paras. 85-94, RA vol. I tab 10. - 19- imprisonment, to disclose solicitor-client privileged information. Even if the privileged information could not be used to imprison the client, the analysis of the violation of the principles of fundamental justice would be the same. It could not seriously be argued that because the privilege belongs to the client, the s. 7 analysis is only engaged (or is differently engaged) if the client is threatened with imprisonment. Solicitor-client privilege and other principles of fundamental justice are not fleeting and intermittent, relevant only when the state threatens to imprison clients through the use of privileged information.

(2) Independence of the Bar is a Principle of Fundamental Justice

70. In his factum, the Appellant acknowledges that:

• "the independence of the Bar is an important structural principle that underlies our legal system" (para. 66);

• "the independence of the Bar is 'one of the hallmarks of a free society' and therefore an important interest that ought to guide state decision-making" (para. 78); and

• "The AGC does not contest the importance of having an independent Bar as part of a well-functioning legal system in Canada. The Bar should be independent of the state in order to ensure that the legal system operates in a fair manner. The cases cited by the BCCA ... all support the general, uncontested proposition that an independent Bar is an essential cornerstone of a free and democratic society." (para. 81)

71. Notwithstanding these admissions, the Appellant submits that the independence of the bar is not a principle of fundamental justice for purposes of Charter s. 7. The Respondent disagrees.

72. Principles of fundamental justice constitute "the basic values underpinning our constitutional order"; the essential tenets which govern the operation of the legal system and the actors wtt. h' m 1t.. 71 They represent shared assumptions which have been recognized in the common law and international conventions as essential elements for the administration of justice founded on the rule of law, or "the basic norms for how the state deals with its citizens.',n Sections 8 to 14 of the Charter embody or exemplify some of those principles, but do not

71 Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford, supra at para. 96, RA vol. I tab 9. 72 Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law v. Canada (Attorney General), 2004 SCC 4, [2004] 1 S.C.R. 76 at para. 8, Appellant's Authorities ("AA'') vol. I tab 12. -20- exhaust them. Identifying a principle of fundamental justice requires an analysis of its nature, sources, rationale and essential role within our legal system. 73

73. As Hamish Stewart writes, the principles at the core of s. 7 are "values that are sufficiently fundamental to restrain the exercise of state power when the subject's most vital interests- life, liberty, and security of the person- are at stake." They are "norms that control the content of the law and the process of the administration of justice in a legal order committed to respecting human dignity and the rule of law". 74

74. Examples of principles of fundamental justice that are relevant to this appeal include:

(a) the right to remain silent, or more broadly, immunity from self-incrimination through statutorily compelled information; 75

(b) the right to the effective assistance of counsel; 76

(d) the rule against arbitrariness, i.e. that a law must further its objective/8

(e) the rule against overbreadth, i.e. that a law must not use broader means than necessary to accomplish its purpose; 79 and

(f) the rule against disproportionality, i.e. that the means used by a law must not be disproportionate to its ends. 80

75. A principle of fundamental justice must meet three criteria:

(a) First, what is it? It must be a legal principle;

73 Re B.C. Motor Vehicle Act, supra at 502-503, 512-513, RA vol. III tab 65; see also Rodriguez v. British Columbia (Attorney General), [1993] 3 S.C.R. 519 at 590-591 and 607, RA vol. III tab 68. 74 H. Stewart, Fundamental Justice: Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Toronto: Irwin Law, 2012) at 103-104, 108, RA vol. IV tab 80. 75 R. v. Hebert, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 151 at 161-162, 186-187, RA vol. III tab 54; R. v. P. (MB.), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 555 at 577-578, RA vol. III tab 62; Application under s. 83.28 of the Criminal Code (Re), 2004 SCC 42, [2004] 2 S.C.R. 248 at paras. 69-70, RA vol. I tab 3. 76 R. v. G.D.B., 2000 SCC 22, [2000] 1 S.C.R. 520 at para. 24, RA vol. III tab 53; R. v. Joanisse (1995), 85 O.A.C. 186 at paras. 63-65, RA vol. III tab 56. 77 Charkaoui v. Canada, supra at paras. 28-29, RA vol. I tab 17; R. v. R.D.S., [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484 at para. 93, RA vol. III tab 63; Ruffo v. Conseil de Ia magistrature, [1995] 4 S.C.R. 267 at para. 38, RA vol. III tab 70. 78 Canada v. PHS Community Services Society, supra at paras. 129-132, RA vol. I tab 10. 79 R. v. Heywood, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 761 at 790-794, RA vol. III tab 55; R. v. Demers, 2004 SCC 46, [2004] 2 S.C.R. 489 at para. 37, RA vol. III tab 51. 80 R. v. Malmo-Levine, supra at paras. 142-143, RA vol. III tab 58. - 21 -

(b) Second, why is it fundamental? There must be a consensus that the rule or principle is fundamental to the way in which the Canadian legal system ought fairly to operate; and

(c) Third, what does it mean? It must be identified with sufficient precision to yield a manageable standard against which to measure deprivations of life, liberty or security of the person. 81

76. The independence of the bar meets all three criteria. First, it is a "legal principle". The Appellant's assertion otherwise belies logic, common sense and authoriti It is incontrovertible that the independence of the judiciary is a legal principle within the meaning of s. 7. 82 In order to ensure public confidence in the justice system, the other branches of government must not be able to exert pressure on the exercise of the judicial function. Judicial independence is a critical constitutional bulwark against the abuse of executive power and other potential intrusions, including from the legislative branch. 83

77. The independence of the bar is grounded in similar values, and likewise has long standing and weight as a foundational legal principle. As Patrick Monahan writes,

There can be no doubt but that the independence of the legal profession is a recognized constitutional principle in Canada. . . . In fact, numerous courts and respected commentators have recognized that access to effective and independent legal counsel is a necessary underpinning for the independence of the judiciary as well as the preservation ofthe rule oflaw.84

78. The second criterion is also met: the authorities demonstrate that independence of the bar is fundamental to the way in which the Canadian legal system ought fairly to operate. Lawyer independence is the fundamental right guaranteeing the public that lawyers may provide legal assistance to clients without fear of government sanction. Legal counsel must be free from state interference in their relationships with clients, such that lawyers can act in clients' best interests

81 Canada v. Khadr, supra at para. 23, RA vol. I tab 12; R. v. D.B., supra at para. 46, RA vol. II tab 50; R. v. Malmo Levine, supra at para. 113, RA vol. III tab 58. 82 Application under s. 83.28 of the Criminal Code (Re), supra at paras. 80-81, RA vol. I tab 3; Reference re Remuneration of the Judges of the Provincial Court ofPrince Edward Island, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 3 at paras. 107, 109, AR vol. III tab 66. 83 Reference re Remuneration of the Judges of the Provincial Court of Prince Edward Island, supra at paras. 10, 111-112, 125, RA vol. III tab 66. 84 P. Monahan, "The Independence of the Bar as a Constitutional Principle in Canada", in In the Public Interest: The Report and Research Papers of the Law Society of Upper Canada Task Force on the Rule of Law and the Independence ofthe Bar (Irwin Law, 2007) 117-149 at 148-149; see also pp. 117, 133, RA vol. IV tab 84. -22- and preserve clients' privileges. This has been a crucial aspect of our justice system for centuries. 85 Put simply, no one could suggest that having a dependent bar would be acceptable in Canada.

79. Independence is particularly crucial when lawyers stand between citizen and state. This is always the case in criminal prosecutions, but it also arises in less litigious areas of the law, from tax advice to resource development, from securities regulation to liquor licensing. The proper dispensation of justice depends on the availability of independent counsel, free of divided loyalties, who can advocate for their clients against the state where appropriate. They are the quintessential restraint on the exercise of state power.86 But for the willingness of A.L. Stein and F.R. Scott to act for Mr. Roncarelli in his challenge to Premier Duplessis' abuses of power, the seminal Canadian case on the rule of law might never have advanced. 87

80. As Chief Justice McLachlin said, in a speech entitled "Professional Independence and the Rule ofLaw",

The lawyer is the vital conduit through which the citizen seeks justice; the mouthpiece, without which the citizen's voice remains an unarticulated and unheard cry. If citizens are to find justice, they must have lawyers. And those lawyers must be independent. 88

81. Numerous authorities confirm that the independence of the bar constitutes a principle of fundamental justice. In Canada (Attorney General) v. Law Society (British Columbia), Estey J. for the Court held as follows:

The independence of the bar from the state in all its pervasive manifestations is one ofthe hallmarks of a free society. Consequently, regulation of these members of the law profession by the state must, so far as by human ingenuity it can be so designed, be free from state interference, in the political sense, with the delivery of services to the

85 See W. Lederman, "The Independence of the Judiciary" (1956) 34 Can. Bar Rev. 769, RA vol. IV tab 89; M. Taylor, "The Independence of the Bar" (1981) Advocate (B.C.) 209, RA vol. IV tab 82; R. Peck, "The Independence of the Bar", in J. Giles, ed., The Splendour of the Law: Allan McEachern- A Tribute to a Life in the Law (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 2001) at 47, RA vol. IV tab 85; J. Giles, "The Independence of the Bar", (2001) 59 Advocate (B.C.) 549, RA vol.IV tab 81. 86 H. Stewart, Fundamental Justice: Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, supra at 103-104, RA vol. IV tab 80. 87 Roncarelli v. Duplessis, [1959] S.C.R. 121 at 121-125, RA vol. III tab 69; see Task Force on the Rule of Law and the Independence of the Bar, "Protecting the Public through an Independent Bar: The Task Force Report", in In the Public Interest: The Report and Research Papers ofthe Law Society of Upper Canada Task Force on the Rule of Law and the Independence ofthe Bar (Irwin Law, 2007) 3-38 at 4-5, RA vol. IV tab 87. 88 McLachlin C.J.C., "Professional Independence and the Rule of Law" (2007), 23 Windsor Rev. Legal & Soc. Issues 3 at p. 4, RA vol. IV tab 83; see also T. Bingham, The Rule ofLaw (London: Allen Lane, 2010) at 92-93, RA vol. IV tab 86. - 23-

individual citizens in the state, particularly in fields of public and criminal law. The public interest in a free society knows no area more sensitive than the independence, impartiality and availability to the general public of the members of the bar and through those members, legal advice and services generally.89

82. In Pearlman v. Manitoba Law Society Judicial Committee, this Court considered the principle of the independence of the bar to be an important contextual factor in determining the application of the principles of fundamental justice. Justice Iacobucci for the Court quoted with approval the following passage from a report of the Ministry of the Attorney General of Ontario:

Stress was rightly laid on the high value that free societies have placed historically on an independent judiciary, free of political interference and influence on its decisions, and an independent bar, free to represent citizens without fear or favour in the protection of individual rights and civil liberties against incursions from any source, including the state.90

83. The Court of Appeal came to a nearly identical conclusion.91 Thus there is no merit to the Appellant's argument, at para. 83 of his factum, that the Court of Appeal's statement in this regard is somehow novel and "surprising". To the contrary, it is well-supported by equally robust declarations in many cases.

84. This Court has repeatedly emphasized the important role that lawyers play in maintaining the rule of law and providing effective counsel. For example, in Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia, Mcintyre J. wrote that "in the absence of an independent legal profession ... the whole legal system would be in a parlous state."92 In Finney v. Barreau du Quebec, the Court held that "An independent bar composed of lawyers who are free of influence by public authorities is an important component of the fundamental legal framework of Canadian society."93 In R. v. Lippe, Lamer J. (as he then was) compared the independence of the bar with a hearing within a reasonable time and other fundamental principles.94

89 Canada (Attorney General) v. Law Society (British Columbia), [1982] 2 S.C.R. 307 at 335-336, AA vol. I tab 8 . 90 Pearlman v. Manitoba Law Society Judicial Committee, [1991] 2 S.C.R. 869 at 886-888, RA vol. II tab 45. 91 BCCA Reasons para. 113, AR vol. I p. 97. 92 Andrews v. Law Society ofBritish Columbia, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 143 at 187, RA vol. I tab 2. 93 Finney v. Barreau du Quebec, 2004 SCC 36, [2004] 2 S.C.R. 17 at para. 1, RA vol. II tab 26; see also Law Society ofBritish Columbia v. Mangat, 2001 SCC 67, [2001] 3 S.C.R. 113 at para. 43, RA vol. II tab 37; Fortin v. Chretien, 2001 SCC 45, [2001] 2 S.C.R. 500 at para. 50, RA vol. II tab 27. 94 R. v. Lippe, [1991] 2 S.C.R. 114 at 141, RA vol. III tab 57. -24-

85. Like the duty of loyalty and solicitor-client confidentiality, the independence of the bar supports both private and public interests.95 First, every client has an obvious private interest in having confidential, loyal counsel who can defend their interests against threats posed by the government or other parties. Second, the public has a strong interest in maintaining access to counsel who are free of conflicting loyalties to the state. Given the adversarial nature of the judicial system, lawyers whose actions are subject to over-riding duties to the state cannot be seen to be effective advocates against laws created by that same state. 96 The integrity of the judicial system, and public confidence in it, relies on the existence of independent legal counsel who can represent their clients and test the case of the government or other opposing party.97

86. Numerous international instruments emphasize the independence of the bar as an essential guarantee of the rule of law, judicial independence and the protection of human rights. For instance, the Basic Principles on the Role ofLawyers, adopted by the Eighth United Nations Congress on the prevention of crime and the treatment of offenders, sets out a number of core values related to the role of legal counsel, including confidentiality, loyalty and access. The document states that "adequate protection of the human rights and fundamental freedoms to which all persons are entitled ... requires that all persons have effective access to legal services provided by an independent legal profession." This document demonstrates that the independence of the bar need not be compromised in the fight against crime.98

87. Similarly, the Universal Declaration on the Independence of Justice, which has been cited by this Court in six cases, affirmed the need to guarantee "the independence of lawyers in the discharge of their professional duties without restrictions, influences, inducements, pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason."99

95 Cote v. Rancourt, 2004 SCC 58, [2004] 3 S.C.R. 248 at paras. 9, 11, RA vol. 1 tab 18; McLachlin C.J.C, "Professional Independence and the Rule of Law", supra at 5, RA vol. IV tab 83; "Protecting the Public through an Independent Bar: The Task Force Report", supra at 27, RA vol. IV tab 87. 96 R. v. Joanisse, supra at paras. 63-65, RA vol. III tab 56. 97 Charkaoui v. Canada, supra at paras. 2-3, 35, 79, RA vol. I tab 17; Vancouver Sun (Re), 2004 SCC 43, [2004] 2 S.C.R. 332 at para. 55, RA vol. III tab 74; and see G.D. Finlayson, "Self-Government of the legal profession-can it continue?" (1985), 4 Advocates' Soc. J. No. 1, 11-16, RA vol. IV tab 79. 98 Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.144/28/Rev.1 (1990), RA vol. IV tab 77; see also the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.l57/23, cl. 27 (1993), adopted by the U.N. World Conference on Human Rights, RA vol. IV tab 88. 99 First World Conference on the Independence of Justice, Montreal, 1983. See S. Shetreet & J. Deschenes, eds., Judicial Independence: The Contemporary Debate (Boston: Martinus NijhoffPublishers, 1985) at 447, RA vol. IV tab 78. -25-

88. In connection with the second criterion, the Appellant submits that recognizing lawyer independence would "immunize lawyers from all laws". 100 This in terrorem argument is groundless. The independence of the judiciary does not immunize judges from all laws. Judges and lawyers have always been subject to laws of general application, including criminal and tax laws. Those laws, and the professional regulatory requirements enacted by law societies, provide parameters within which lawyers can and must serve clients. However, the independence of the bar means that, within the solicitor-client relationship, the lawyer "knows but one person in all the world, and that person is his client". 101 The state cannot interfere with the independence of the bar by intruding on the means and content of the legal services delivered by lawyers to their clients. The Regime is unconstitutional because it does so.

89. This leads to the third criterion: the independence of the bar is a sufficiently precise and manageable standard to be considered a principle of fundamental justice. The Appellant argues at para. 87 of his factum that the independence of the bar does not meet this criterion because it is an "amorphous concept" that cannot be defined with sufficient precision to qualify as a principle of fundamental justice. The concept of an independent bar is no more amorphous than that of an independent judiciary, which is a precise and manageable standard against which numerous claims have been adjudicated. Moreover, the authorities cited above substantially develop the principle ofthe independence ofthe bar.

90. For example, in her speech on Professional Independence, the Chief Justice set out "The Ten Commandments of an Independent Bar". That framework outlines key elements of what an independent bar means and requires. 102 Likewise, international instruments regarding the independence of the bar have refined the concept. Accordingly, the independence of the bar meets the three criteria to be considered a principle of fundamental justice.

91. Related concepts support the principle of an independent bar. This Court has firmly established the "bright line" rule, that a lawyer may not represent one client whose interests are directly adverse to the immediate interests of another. This rule "reflects the fact that the lawyer client relationship is a relationship based on trust"; clients will not trust lawyers if they have

100 AF para. 82. 101 R. v. Neil, 2002 SCC 70, [2002] 3 S.C.R. 631 at para. 12, RA vol. III tab 60. 102 McLachlin C.J.C, "Professional Independence and the Rule ofLaw", supra at 6-7, RA vol. IV tab 83. -26- conflicting loyalties. 103 The central concern is to ensure that clients are not prejudiced by virtue of lawyers' other loyalties and duties. 104

92. When Binnie J. set out the bright line rule in Neil, he held: "The value of an independent bar is diminished unless the lawyer is free from conflicting interests. Loyalty, in that sense, promotes effective representation, on which the problem-solving capability of an adversarial system rests."105 Thus, loyalty and independence are intertwined in our conception of the role of lawyers in the administration of justice, and provide depth to the s. 7 analysis in this case. The loyalty and independence of counsel are especially important when the party adverse to the client is the government. In such cases, the Regime would force lawyers to choose between their clients' interests in not having information recorded for state use, and their personal interests in avoiding imprisonment by acting on behalf of the very government which their clients have retained them to oppose. That inherent conflict is not in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.

93. The Appellant argues at para. 86 of his factum that the independence of the bar was "discarded" in R. v. Cunningham. The Respondent disagrees. In Cunningham, this Court accepted the importance of the independence of the bar. The Court held that if counsel seeks to withdraw solely for non-payment of fees - not for ethical reasons such as a breakdown of the solicitor-client relationship - then as a "remedy of last resort" the court could refuse counsel's application in exceptional cases. It is critical to note that the factors identified by this Court as guiding this decision are all "independent of the solicitor-client relationship". Courts must not intrude upon the integrity of that relationship, or prejudice the client by requiring the disclosure of privileged information. 106 As such, Cunningham supports the position of the Respondent, not that of the Appellant.

94. In summary, the authorities reveal consistent themes which demonstrate that the independence of the bar is a principle of fundamental justice:

(a) An independent bar is essential to the administration of justice;

103 Canadian National Railway Co. v. McKercher LLP, 2013 SCC 39, [2013] 2 S.C.R. 649 at para. 28, RA vol. I Tab 14. 104 CNR v. McKercher LLP, supra at paras. 20-22, RA vol. I tab 14. 105 R. v. Neil, supra at para. 13, RA vol. III tab 60. 106 R. v. Cunningham, 2010 SCC 10, [2010] 1 S.C.R. 331 at paras. 30-31, 39, 45-50, RA vol. II tab 49. -27-

(b) Lawyers must be in a position to provide legal services to clients free from government control or other improper external pressure; and

95. The Regime is profoundly inconsistent with these principles.

(3) Solicitor-Client Privilege is a Principle of Fundamental Justice

96. The Appellant acknowledges at para. 67 of his factum that solicitor-client privilege is a principle of fundamental justice. However, the Appellant argues at para. 75 that privilege only applies where a client's liberty is at stake, and that it is therefore not infringed by the Regime. This is an artificially constrained view of the privilege.

97. This Court has consistently upheld the privilege as one of the most fundamental legal principles, in criminal and civil cases. All information which a person provides to a lawyer for purposes of obtaining legal advice is confidential and privileged, and must remain so. Moreover, the privilege is not just an evidentiary rule that protects clients from being imprisoned through the improper use of privileged information; it is also a substantive civil right that prevents lawyers' offices from being used as archives for the use of the prosecution. 107

98. In its decisions in Maranda v. Richer and Foster Wheeler Power Co., the Court set out a clear imperative which forbids routine use by the state of lawyers to gather and hold information about clients in the course of providing legal services. This principle applies directly to the present appeal, and demonstrates the unconstitutionality of the Regime.

99. Maranda v. Richer concerned the availability of a warrant to search a law office for billing information. (A warrant is not required under the Act for FINTRAC searches oflawyers' offices.) The Court held that a warrant ought to be refused unless the applicant demonstrates that it has exhausted all other possibilities and "there is no other reasonable solution". 108

107 Solosky v. The Queen, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 821 at 839, RA vol. III tab 72; Descoteaux v. Mierzwinski, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 860 at 873-882, 887-896, RA vol. I tab 20; R. v. McClure, 2001 SCC 14, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 445 at paras. 17, 24-25, 31-33, 41, RA vol. III tab 59; Lavallee, supra at paras. 16, 21, 36, 49, RA vol. II tab 34; Blank v. Canada (Department ofJustice), 2006 SCC 39, [2006] 2 S.C.R. 319 at para. 24, RA vol. I tab 5. 108 Maranda v. Richer, 2003 SCC 67, [2003] S.C.R. 193 at para. 15, RA vol. II tab 40. -28-

100. Writing for the majority, LeBel J. stressed the sanctity of client information held by legal counsel, and the client's right to be free from self-incrimination. Referring to Lavallee and earlier cases, he noted that "The aim in those decisions was to avoid lawyers becoming, even involuntarily, a resource to be used in the criminal prosecution of their clients, thus jeopardizing the constitutional protection against self-incrimination enjoyed by the clients."109 Returning to this theme at para. 37 of his reasons, LeBel J. wrote that:

The confidentiality of the solicitor-client relationship is essential to the functioning of the criminal justice system and to the protection of the constitutional rights of accused persons. It is important that lawyers, who are bound by stringent ethical rules, not have their offices turned into archives for the use ofthe prosecution. [emphasis added]

101. The fundamental constitutional defect in the Regime is that its purpose and effect is exactly what LeBel J. held was impermissible: the Regime imposes obligations on lawyers to generate evidence that could be used in the criminal prosecution of their clients, and which must be archived by lawyers for later retrieval by law enforcement.

102. Foster Wheeler was a civil case regarding the propriety of questions asked during an examination on discovery regarding information provided to municipal authorities by their lawyers. The Court recognized that while much of the jurisprudence on privilege has developed in criminal cases, it remains equally applicable in civil cases. The Court also acknowledged the broad and evolving legal services provided by lawyers, from negotiating and drafting contracts to filling out forms and having discussions with board members. In all respects, "the fundamental relationship of trust between lawyers and clients" must be preserved.110

103. The Court held that there is a presumption that all information shared between client and lawyer is confidential and therefore cannot be revealed. Any party seeking to rebut the presumption in a particular case has the onus of proving that disclosure of the specific information sought will not breach the obligation of confidentiality. "This would prevent 'fishing expeditions' in which lawyers, through the files they handle and reports they prepare for their clients, are used as a source of information for building cases against their own clients."lll

109 Maranda v. Richer, supra at para. 12, RA vol. II tab 40. 11°Foster Wheeler Power Co. v. Societe intermunicipale de gestion et d'elimination des dechets (SIGED) inc., 2004 SCC 18, [2004] 1 S.C.R. 456 at paras. 34, 38, RA vol. II tab 28. 111 Foster Wheeler, supra at para. 42, RA vol. II tab 28. -29-

104. This Court also addressed access to lawyers' files in the context of civil proceedings when lawyers for a party executing an Anton Piller order gained access to privileged information from the opposing party. The Court held that "prejudice will be presumed to flow from an opponent's access to relevant solicitor-client confidences."112 Lawyers' client files must remain completely confidential other than in exceptional circumstances, and subject to strict limitations.

105. As these cases affirm, the protection granted by the courts to the confidentiality of the solicitor-client relationship extends to "all information which a person must provide in order to obtain legal advice", including "matters of an administrative nature". Privilege applies to "all interactions between a client and his or her lawyer", and extends to all types of legal advice - civil, regulatory, criminal or otherwise. 113 Disclosure of information to third parties without client consent is extraordinary; it cannot be the norm.

106. There is good reason for this broad approach. The protection of solicitor-client confidentiality supports society's interest in a fair, just and efficient law enforcement process. The privilege is "a positive feature of law enforcement, not an impediment to it."114

107. The rationale underlying the need to shield clients' confidential information from access by others is well-known: counsel can only provide sound legal advice on the basis of full information. Clients must be encouraged to "make a clean breast of it" to lawyers they consult, so they can "place unrestricted and unbounded confidence in the professional agent, and that the communications he so makes to him should be kept secret, unless with his consent"Y5 As Sopinka J. wrote in MacDonald Estate v. Martin, clients bare their soul to their counsel:

Clients do this in the justifiable belief that nothing they say will be used against them and to the advantage of the adversary. Loss of this confidence would deliver a serious blow to the integrity of the profession and to the public's confidence in the administration of JUStice.• • 1T6

112 Celanese Canada Inc. v. Murray Demolition Corp., 2006 SCC 36, [2006] 2 S.C.R. 189 at para. 3, RA vol. I tab 15; see also Pritchard v. Ontario (Human Rights Commission), 2004 SCC 31, [2004] 1 S.C.R. 809 at paras. 14-21, 27-36, RA vol. II tab 46. 113 Maranda v. Richer, supra at para. 22; RA vol. II tab 40 Blood Tribe Department of Health v. Canada (Privacy Commissioner), 2008 SCC 44, [2008] 2 S.C.R. 574 at paras. 9-10, RA vol. I tab 6. 114 Lavallee, supra at para. 36, RA vol. II tab 34. 115 Anderson v. Bank of British Columbia (1876), 2 Ch. D. 644 (C.A.) at 649, RA vol. I tab 1, quoted in R. v. McClure, supra at para. 32, RA vol. III tab 59; seeR. v. Campbell, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 565 at para. 49, RA vol. II tab 4 7; Blank v. Canada, supra at para. 26, RA vol. I tab 5. 116 MacDonald Estate v. Martin, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 1235 at 1244, RA vol. II tab 39. - 30-

108. Similarly, Cory J. held that lawyers' duty to preserve their clients' confidences, along with the duty ofloyalty, is essential to the operation of the legal system:

Lawyers are an integral and vitally important part of our system of justice. . . . [A] client will often be required to reveal to the lawyer retained highly confidential information. The client's most secret devices and desires, the client's most frightening fears will often, of necessity, be revealed. The client must be secure in the knowledge that the lawyer will neither disclose nor take advantage ofthese revelations.

Our judicial system could not operate if this were not the case. It cannot function properly if doubt or suspicion exists in the mind of the public that the confidential information disclosed by a client to a lawyer might be revealed. 117

109. In the present case, while there is no suggestion that lawyers would "take advantage" of clients' revelations, the very purpose of the Regime is to enable law enforcement agents to do so. Further, the fact that the information sought by law enforcement may not appear to be of great sensitivity is beside the point; the lawyer would not have it but for the solicitor-client relationship, and clients are entitled to expect that all information held by their lawyer about them is at least presumptively protected. 118

110. An argument similar to that advanced by the Appellant was dismissed in Canada (Privacy Commissioner) v. Blood Tribe, in which the Privacy Commissioner sought access to material over which privilege had been claimed, for the purpose of ensuring compliance with the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act. The Court held:

Client confidence is the underlying basis for the privilege, and infringement must be assessed through the eyes of the client. To a client, compelled disclosure to an administrative officer, even if not disclosed further, would constitute an infringement of the confidentiality. The objection is all the more serious where (as here) there is a possibility of the privileged information being made public or used against the person entlt. 1 e d to t h e pnv1 . '1 ege .... 119

111. In the result, the Court concluded that "The Privacy Commissioner has not made out a case that routine access to solicitor client confidences is 'absolutely necessary' to achieve the ends sought by PIPEDA. There are other less intrusive remedies". 120

117 MacDonald Estate v. Martin, supra at 1265-1266 [emphasis added], RA vol. II tab 39. 118 BCSC Reasons para. 108, AR vol. I pp. 33-34. 119 Blood Tribe Department ofHealth v. Canada, supra at para. 21, RA vol. I tab 6. 120 Blood Tribe Department ofHealth v. Canada, supra at para. 31, RA vol. I tab 6. - 31 -

112. FINTRAC is analogous to the Privacy Commissioner, seeking routine access to solicitor client information for purposes of ensuring compliance with the Act. The Appellant has not demonstrated that such access is absolutely necessary. As such, the Respondent submits that the analysis and result in Blood Tribe are directly applicable to this case.

113. Another government official's attempt to access solicitor-client information in purportedly carrying out his statutory mandate was similarly denied in British Columbia (Auditor General) v. British Columbia (Ministry of Attorney General). Pursuant to the Auditor General Act, the Auditor General sought document production in connection with an audit of legal fee indemnities for provincial officials. The Auditor General argued that he needed access to the officials' legal accounts in order to assess the effectiveness, fairness and transparency of the implementation of the Province's indemnity policy. The Auditor General relied upon his statutory obligation of confidentiality as providing assurances that the information he sought would not be further divulged. 121 He also noted that law societies review privileged material.

114. Chief Justice Bauman (now C.J.B.C.) rejected these arguments. In respect of the law societies, he held that their rights of access are based on the "'unique context' of statutes dealing with the regulation of the legal profession" which make such access inevitable, unlike in the Auditor General's situation. 122 In response to the Auditor General's assurances that he would keep the information confidential, Bauman C.J. quoted para. 21 from Blood Tribe (set out above). Overall, Bauman C.J. held:

All citizens must be able to freely discuss their legal positions with their lawyers and to take frank advice thereon, secure in the knowledge that this relationship - that between solicitor and client- is as sacred as any secular business relationship can be.

It would be wrong to conclude that the result in this case represents a triumph of secrecy over transparency and accountability. It rather represents the reaffirmation of a principle which is a cornerstone value in our democracy and which has been so for hundreds of years. 123

121 British Columbia (Auditor General) v. British Columbia (Ministry of Attorney General), 2013 BCSC 98, 40 B.C.L.R. (5th) 390 at paras. 1-9,54,149, RA vol. I tab 7. 122 British Columbia (Auditor General) v. British Columbia (Ministry ofAttorney General), supra at para. 137; see r:aras. 131-136, RA vol. I tab 7. 23 British Columbia (Auditor General) v. British Columbia (Ministry ofAttorney General), supra at paras. 24-25, RA vol. I tab 7. -32-

115. These cases confirm the threshold that must be met before the state can access client information in lawyers' files: only when the applicant can demonstrate that the access sought is "absolutely necessary" in the circumstances. 124 This is a very high standard: "Absolute necessity is as restrictive a test as may be formulated short of an absolute prohibition in every case." 125

116. Collectively, these cases affirm the following principles:

• All information held by lawyers about clients is presumed to be confidential and therefore protected from access by or disclosure to any other party, including the state.

• Disclosure of such information is presumed to be prejudicial to clients, and must be avoided other than in demonstrably exceptional circumstances and subject to strict, case-specific limitations.

• Lawyers' files must not be used by the state as resources for incriminating their clients.

• The state can only seek information from legal counsel about their clients in individual cases where the state demonstrates, through evidence, that it is "absolutely necessary" and there is "no other reasonable solution" in the specific circumstances of the case.

117. The Regime directly violates these principles, by requiring lawyers to obtain and record information from their clients that is subject to routine warrantless search by FINTRAC, and potential access by prosecutors.

118. The Appellant argues at para. 73 of his factum that financial records are not privileged, implying that the Regime is unobjectionable because it is limited to such information. Neither contention is correct. Accounting records may be privileged. 126 In Donell, cited by the Appellant, the court refused to order production of the law firm's entire file or even its trust ledger. Rather, the court carefully reviewed the ledger entries for privilege, and ordered the disclosure of only four entries. Further, the court held that there could be no disclosure of any information that "reflects the solicitor-client relationship and what transpires within it", or that "could be used to

124 R. v. McClure, supra at para. 35, RA vol. III tab 59; Lavallee, supra at para. 36, RA vol. II tab 34. 125 Ontario (Ministry of Correctional Services) v. Goodis, 2006 SCC 31, [2006) 2 S.C.R. 32 at para. 20, RA vol. II tab 42; see also Ontario (Public Safety and Security) v. Criminal Lawyers' Association, 2010 SCC 23, [2010) 1 S.C.R. 815 at para. 53, AA vol. I tab 31.

126 Canada (Procureur general) c. Chambre des notaires du Quebec, supra at paras. 77-81, RA vol. I tab 13. - 33- deduce or otherwise acquire communications protected by solicitor-client privilege."127 In our case, the Regime would require lawyers to record and disclose far more than the type of trust ledger entries disclosed in Donell; and the Regime would apply to all lawyers providing legal services in connection with designated transactions, regardless of prejudice to the client.

119. The limited nature of Donell is confirmed by Kaiser, in which the Ontario Court of Appeal refused to order disclosure of the identity of the payor of a client's legal fees. The court confirmed that administrative information regarding the establishment of a solicitor-client relationship is presumptively privileged, and can only be rebutted by a party seeking disclosure on a case-by-case basis. 128 That conclusion is consistent with Descoteaux v. Mierzwinski, in which a legal aid application form would have been privileged but for the application of the cnmma. . 1 purpose excep t'wn. 129

120. These cases highlight the inaccuracy of the Appellant's argument at para. 72 that FINTRAC is entitled to "tombstone information". In some circumstances, even a name is privileged. 130 Yet the Regime would require lawyers to record far more information than that; hold it for five years in case law enforcement needs to access it; and demonstrate their compliance with these requirements to FINTRAC in the context of a warrantless search.

121. Finally, Donell, Kaiser and this Court's many civil cases concerning privilege all demonstrate that it remains fundamentally relevant to the analysis of a proposed intrusion into the solicitor-client relationship, regardless of whether clients' liberty is at stake.

(4) The Regime Does Not Conform with the Principles of Fundamental Justice

122. Our legal system requires, and clients expect, that lawyers are fearless, zealous advocates, loyal to their cause. Lawyers are retained by clients to stand between them and the state. In order to maintain the integrity of this relationship in the public interest, courts have developed substantial protections for the independence of the bar and the confidentiality of information shared between clients and lawyers.

123. As the courts below held, the basic premise of the Regime contradicts these values. As a precondition of providing legal advice regarding a financial transaction, lawyers would be

127 Donell v. GJB Enterprises Inc., 2012 BCCA 135, 319 B.C.A.C. 17 at paras. 60, 64, RA vol. I tab 21. 128 Kaiser (Re), 2012 ONCA 838, 300 O.A.C. 161 at paras. 21, 24-32, RA vol. II tab 33. 129 Descoteaux v. Mierzwinski, supra at 892-896, RA vol. I tab 20. 130 Lavallee, supra at para. 28, RA vol. II tab 34. -34- required to obtain and record substantial information regarding their clients. 131 FINTRAC could access that information at any time, and pass it on to law enforcement agents or potentially introduce it into court. Lawyers would be required to retain the information for five years, so that the police could obtain evidence to prosecute clients. Law enforcement officials could also seek ex parte orders for production of information from FINTRAC.

124. Under the Regime, legal counsel would not be independent: they would not be free from state incursion on the manner by which they advise clients. Lawyers would be "used as a source of information for building cases against their own clients". Their offices would be "turned into archives for the use of the prosecution". Client trust and confidence in the legal profession and the justice system would be significantly undermined. In short, as the Court of Appeal held, "the Regime will tum at least some lawyers into agents of the state."132

125. At para. 91 of his factum, the Appellant argues that the Regime does not violate Charter s. 7 because s. 11 of the Act allegedly protects privilege. Section 11 only protects lawyers from having to disclose privileged information. There is no equivalent provision with respect to the requirements to record and retain information pursuant to ss. 6 - 6.1 of the Act. As such, s. 11 does nothing to ameliorate the statutory purpose of conscripting lawyers to gather information to incriminate clients. 133 Moreover, it is apparent from the Appellant's factum that the government takes a very narrow view of what information is actually protected by privilege.

126. Throughout his factum, the Appellant refers to lawyers as "financial intermediaries", suggesting that they are only subject to the Regime when they are simply handling funds for clients, not providing legal advice. The courts below rejected this artificial distinction. 134 Solicitors commonly advise clients regarding the legal structuring of all sorts of transactions, from the purchase of a business to the transfer of a family asset. In the course of providing such legal services, solicitors may conduct transactions on their clients' instructions.

127. Courts have refused to parse the role oflegal counsel into discrete activities and separate out those that involve financial transactions. This does not reflect the breadth of many lawyers'

131 BCSC Reasons paras. 108, 202, AR vol. I pp. 33-34, 55; BCCA Reasons paras. 69, 81, AR vol. I pp. 85, 88. 132 BCCA Reasons para. 124, AR vol. I p. 99. 133 BCSC Reasons para. 137, AR vol. I p. 41. 134 BCSC Reasons paras. 103-105, 114-122, 135, AR vol. I pp. 32-33, 35-38, 40; BCCA Reasons paras. 65-69, AR vol. I pp. 84-85. - 35- retainers by their clients, and the general legal services which solicitors often provide. 135 Thus the fact that a lawyer negotiated with an opposing party, dealt with an appraiser and signed tax returns for his client did not vitiate his role as legal counsel. 136

128. The Appellant's characterization of solicitors as "financial intermediaries" fails to appreciate that lawyers not only tell clients the law, but also advise clients on what should be done in the relevant legal context, and carry out clients' instructions in that regard. The negotiation of a commercial lease is a common solicitor's task. Factual, financial and administrative documents created pursuant to such a retainer are privileged:

Once solicitors are embarked on a conveyancing transaction they are employed to ensure that the client steers clear of legal difficulties ... [T]he whole handling is legal skill in action and 'a document passing during a transaction does not have to incorporate a specific piece of legal advice to obtain that privilege' .137

129. When legal counsel acts on behalf of a client, "the only rational inference is that if a 138 transaction occurs, it is due to instructions - communications - from the client." This IS consistent with the presumption of privilege with respect to lawyers' trust account records .139

130. As LeBel J. noted in Maranda v. Richer, there have been a few cases in which "counsel was acting not in that capacity but simply as a conduit for transfers of funds." 140 These cases appropriately distinguish between a lawyer providing legal advice in the context of a transaction, and the uncommon circumstances in which a lawyer has acted exclusively as a "financial intermediary"- in short, a lawyer who is not acting in her professional capacity as such. 141

131. The determination of whether a lawyer acted solely as a financial intermediary can only be made in the circumstances of each case. The Regime turns this analysis on its head, by

135 Foster Wheeler, supra at paras. 32-36, 38, 41, RA vol. II tab 28. 136 Camp Development Corp. v. South Coast Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority, 2011 BCSC 88 at paras. 30-48, RA vol. I tab 8. 137 Balabel v. Air India, [1988] Ch. 317, [1988] 2 All E.R. 246 (C.A.) at 254, 256, RA vol. I tab 4; Currie v. Symcor Inc. (2008), 244 O.A.C. 3 (C.A.) at paras. 45-46, RA vol. I tab 19; Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP v. Canada (Minister ofNational Revenue), 2002 BCSC 1344,6 B.C.L.R. (4th) 135 at paras. 12-16, RA vol. II tab 29. 138 Patrick and Littleton (Re), 2006 QCCS 2276, [2006] Q.J. No. 3834 at para. 13, RA vol. II tab 44. 139 Maranda v. Richer, supra at paras. 1-5, 33, 45-46, RA vol. II tab 40. 140 Maranda v. Richer, supra at para. 30, RA vol. II tab 40; Chambre des Notaires du Quebec c. Canada (Procureur general), 2010 QCCS 4215 at paras. 98, 109, RA vol. I tab 16. 141 R. v. Campbell, supra at paras. 49-50, RA vol. II tab 47; Law Society of B.C. Professional Conduct Handbook, c. 4 footnote 3, F. Wilson Affidavit #2, Ex. "A" p. 19, AR vol. V p. 52. - 36- applying to all lawyers' conduct of transactions for clients, regardless of whether lawyers are providing legal advice to their clients. 142 Accordingly, the Regime violates s. 7 ofthe Charter.

C. THE REGIME VIOLATES SECTION 8 OF THE CHARTER

132. The courts below found it unnecessary to address s. 8 of the Charter because they found the Regime unconstitutional under s. 7. In accordance with Constitutional Question #5, we address s. 8 in the following section.

133. The test for analyzing an alleged infringement of s. 8 requires the court to determine whether there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in the circumstances; and if so, whether the search or seizure constitutes an unreasonable intrusion on that right ofprivacy.143

134. The first aspect of the s. 8 test is easily met in this case. Every client has a reasonable expectation of privacy regarding all information about the client in the possession of the client's lawyer. 144 This is so regardless of whether the information relates to litigation, a commercial transaction on which the lawyer has provided legal advice, or a tax or other regulatory filing. 145 This privacy expectation accords with lawyers' common law and professional duties, noted above, to maintain the confidentiality of all information known to the lawyer about the client. 146

135. The second aspect of the s. 8 test is whether the search is unreasonable. A warrantless search, such as that authorized by ss. 62-63.1 of the Act, is prima facie unreasonable. 147 The searches authorized by ss. 62-63.1 of the Act are also unreasonable by virtue of the vast amount of client information in lawyers' offices to which FINTRAC can demand access. FINTRAC can review and copy any document, require unlimited assistance from those present and demand unfettered access to lawyers' computers and data processing systems.

136. This Court's recent decision in R. v. Vu confirms the problems inherent in such an expansive search power. The Court held that a general authority to search premises does not permit the officer to also search computers located at the premises, because computers give

142 BCSC Reasons para. 117, AR vol. I p. 36; BCCA Reasons paras. 66, 68-69 AR vol. I pp. 84-85. 143 R. v. Edwards, [1996] 1 S.C.R. 128 at para. 33, RA vol. III tab 52. 144 Lavallee, supra at para. 35; see also para. 49, RA vol. II tab 34. 145 Canada (Procureur general) c. Chambre des notaires du Quebec (QCCA), supra at para. 101, RA vol. I tab 13. 146 Ott v. Fleishman (1983), 46 B.C.L.R. 321 (S.C.), RA vol. II tab 43. 147 Hunterv. Southam, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 145 at 160-168, RA vol. II tab 32. - 37- search agents "access to vast amounts of information". 148 This principle applies equally to business computers and data networks. 149

137. The Appellant argues at paras. 105 and 134 of his factum that FINTRAC searches are "specific, targeted and limited". The Regime does not limit FINTRAC's access to documents which legal counsel are required to retain by Part 1 of the Act. It is virtually inevitable that in an unrestricted law office search, as authorized by s. 62 of the Act, irrelevant and confidential client information would be accessed by FINTRAC. The search power is not "strictly controlled." 150

138. The Appellant's suggestion that lawyers have limited privacy interests in their business records misses the point: FINTRAC searches invade clients' privacy interests. All of the information which lawyers must record under the Regime relates to clients. This includes "receipt of funds" records, on which lawyers are required by the Regime to record client information including the purpose and details of the transaction. To the extent that such information relates to facts the lawyer requires in order to advise the client, it is privileged and not a legitimate subject of federal control. 151 To the extent that the information is extraneous to the legal advice sought, then by requiring lawyers to obtain and record such information, the Regime's objective is self-incriminatory and objectionable.

139. The Appellant asserts that the search provisions are reasonable because they are appropriate for a regulatory scheme. The title and objects of the Act, and the evidence, all confirm that it is criminal not regulatory law. 152 It is aimed at deterring, detecting and investigating crime. The purpose of imposing the Regime on lawyers includes having a paper trail about clients created and retained by lawyers, because the police want access to lawyers' specific knowledge about their clients.

140. If the purpose of the Regime were solely to regulate lawyers per se, it would be ultra vires Parliament. The keeping of books and records by lawyers falls within the regulation of the

148 R. v. Vu, 2013 SCC 60 at para. 24; see paras. 20-22, 39-43, 46-52, 55-56, RA vol. III tab 64. 149 R. v. Cole, 2012 SCC 53, [2012] 3 S.C.R. 34 at paras. 1, 47-48, RA vol. II tab 48; and seeR. v. Vu, supra at para. 64, RA vol. III tab 64. 150 Descoteaux v. Mierzwinski, supra at 889, RA vol. I tab 20. 151 Maranda v. Richer, supra at para. 22, RA vol. II tab 40; Kaiser (Re), supra at para. 38, RA vol. II tab 33. 152 BCSC Reasons paras. 136, 140, 142, AR vol. I pp. 40-42. - 38- practice of law, a law society matter. 153 The law societies have exercised their jurisdiction by implementing and enforcing the No Cash and Client ID rules.

141. The Appellant argues that s. 64 of the Act protects privileged information from disclosure. Section 64 is very similar to and suffers the same deficiencies as s. 488.1 of the Criminal Code, which was struck down in Lavallee because it did not ensure minimal impairment of privilege. 154 Contrary to the "constitutional imperatives" prescribed in Lavallee, no warrant is required for FINTRAC to search a lawyer's office. FINTRAC can do so without any suspicion or grounds therefor, let alone having demonstrated to a judicial officer that there is no other reasonable alternative. As well, the Regime provides no protection whatsoever for confidential but not privileged information. 155

142. The government has acknowledged that the Act does not comply with Lavallee.156 FINTRAC's Manager indicated that if the Regime is applied to lawyers, FINTRAC would conduct its searches "having regard to the general principles" set out in Lavallee. 157 FINTRAC made no firm commitment to abide by the Lavallee principles. In any event, such a policy cannot bring ss. 62 - 65 of the Act into compliance with s. 8 of the Charter. FINTRAC's policy is not law. As Arbour J. held in Lavallee, "the constitutionality of a statutory provision cannot rest on an expectation that the Crown will refrain from doing what it is permitted to do."158

D. THE VIOLATIONS CANNOT BE JUSTIFIED UNDER SECTION 1

143. The courts below fully canvassed the Appellant's s. 1 arguments, which have not changed on appeal. As such, we address them only briefly here.

144. A Charter section 7 or 8 breach can only be justified under s. 1 where the government demonstrates the presence of "exceptional conditions" such as "natural disasters, the outbreak of

153 Law Society of British Columbia v. Mangat, supra at paras. 38-46, RA vol. II tab 37; CNR. v. McKercher LLP, supra at para. 15, RA vol. I tab 14; Legal Profession Act, S.B.C. 1998, c. 9, s. 3. 15 Lavallee, supra at paras. 36-45, RA vol. II tab 34; s. 64 of the Act suffers additional deficiencies, identified at BCSC Reasons para. 138, AR vol. I p. 41. 155 Lavallee, supra at para. 49, RA vol. II tab 34; BCCA Reasons para. 88, AR vol. I p. 90. 156 Varro Affidavit, para. 11 and Exhibit "C", AR vol. II pp. 3, 161. 157 Donovan Affidavit, para. 96, AR vol. XXVIII p. 214. 158 Lavallee, supra at para. 45, RA vol. II tab 34; Little Sisters Book & Art Emporium v. Canada (Minister of Justice), 2000 SCC 69, [2000] 2 S.C.R. 1120 at paras. 85, 204, RA vol. II tab 38 ; Canada (Procureur general) c. Chambre des notaires du Quebec (QCCA), supra at para. 122, RA vol. I tab 13. -39- war, epidemics and the like". 159 Since the advent of the Charter in 1982 there has been no case in which this Court has found such conditions to exist. None are present here.

145. Deterring, detecting, investigating and prosecuting money laundering and terrorist financing is a legitimate federal objective, meeting the first step in the Oakes test. Given that the Regime requires lawyers to retain their records for access by police, the Regime is rationally connected to this objective. However, as the courts below found, the Regime is neither minimally impairing nor proportionate, and thus cannot satisfy the second step in the Oakes test.

146. The Appellant argues at para. 131 of his factum that Parliament has made a reasonable choice to regulate lawyers. That submission ignores the existence of law societies' regulation of their members. The Court cannot "satisfy itself that a particular legislative limit is "reasonable" if it is blinkered from considering whether other less limiting measures were available."160

147. To the extent that Parliament's objective is to ensure lawyers perform "due diligence" on clients, this objective is met by the law societies' comprehensive regulation of the profession, including the implementation and enforcement of the No Cash and Client ID rules. In these circumstances, as the courts below found, there is no need to impose the Regime on lawyers. 161

148. Contrary to the Appellant's submission at para. 128 of his factum, there is no evidence that law society regulation has been weak or inconsistent. Indeed, the Chambers Judge determined that the evidence is to the contrary: there have been "very few breaches of the No Cash Rule" and "no reported disciplinary proceedings involving a breach of the Client ID Rule". 162 The rules and the law societies' related educational and enforcement initiatives are

159 Re B.C. Motor Vehicle Act, supra at 518, RA vol. III tab 65; R. v. D.B., supra at paras. 89, 95, RA vol. II tab 50; Charkaoui v. Canada, supra, at para. 66, RA vol. I tab 17; Suresh v. Canada, 2002 SCC 1, [2002] 1 S.C.R. 3 at paras. 78, 128, RA vol. III tab 73; Lavallee, supra at para. 46, RA vol. II tab 34. 160 R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103 at 136, 138-140, RA vol. III tab 61; Newfoundland (Treasury Board) v. N.A.P.E., 2004 sec 66, [2004] 3 S.C.R. 381 at para. 113, and see paras. 53-54, 112, RA vol. II tab 41; Alberta v. Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony, 2009 SCC 37, [2009] 2 S.C.R. 567 at paras. 53-54, AA vol. I tab 1; RJR MacDonald Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), [1995] 3 S.C.R. 199 at para. 160, RA vol. III tab 67. 161 BCSC Reasons paras. 187,208-209,212-213, AR vol. I pp. 52, 56-57; BCCA Reasons paras. 138-142, AR vol. I p. 103; see RJR-MacDonald v. Canada, supra at paras. 143-144, RA vol. III tab 67; Vriend v. Alberta, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 493 at paras. 113-116, RA vol. III tab 75. 162 BCSC Reasons para. 34, AR vol. I p. 11; BCCA Reasons paras. 147-149. -40- having the desired effect. FINTRAC has acknowledged its "satisfaction with the law societies' ability to ensure their members' compliance."163

149. The Regime has been in force for ten years without applying to the legal profession. In that time "there is no evidence that lawyers have become 'the most sought after resource by criminal organizations' to launder proceeds of crime", as one of the Appellant's affiants speculated in a 2003 report. 164 There is no "gap" allowing clients to use lawyers to launder funds.

150. This leaves the objective of investigating and prosecuting money laundering and terrorist financing offences, which can and should be conducted though the ordinary mechanisms available under the Criminal Code, rather than via the warrantless search procedure provided under the Act. In these circumstances, all of the objectives of the impugned provisions are already met by much less harmful alternatives.

151. At para. 129 of his factum, the Appellant argues that law society rules are no less of an intrusion on lawyers' and clients' affairs, as if this somehow justifies the Regime. As both courts below held, this argument cannot succeed. 165 The purpose of law society regulation of the legal profession is to protect the public interest in the availability, confidentiality and quality of legal services, not to fight crime. 166

152. By contrast, the purpose of the Regime's imposition of obligations on the legal profession is to facilitate the deterrence, detection, investigation and prosecution of crime. Compelled recording of and access by government agencies to solicitor-client information, as proposed by the Regime, would be unprecedented and disproportionate in light of the law society rules. As the Chambers Judge held, there are "no instances where government agencies have been permitted to impose a requirement as a condition of receiving legal advice that clients provide information to the lawyer that the government may wish to access later."167

163 BCSC Reasons para. 207, AR vol. I pp. 55-56; BCCA Reasons para. 153, AR vo1. I pp. 105-106; Donovan Affidavit, para. 100, AR vo1. XXVIII p. 215; Transcript of Grasham Examination, Poissant Affidavit, Ex. A, pp. 29, 57, AR vol. LXV pp. 181,209. 164 BCSC Reasons para. 219, AR vol. I p. 58-59. 165 BCSC Reasons paras. 186-213, AR vol. I pp. 51-57; BCCA Reasons paras. 143-146, AR vol. I pp. 103-104. 166 BCCA Reasons paras. 137-146; Greene v. Law Society ofBritish Columbia, 2005 BCSC 390, 40 B.C.L.R. (4th) 125 at paras. 50-51. RA vol. II tab 30; Skogstad v. The Law Society of British Columbia, 2007 BCCA 310, 69 B.C.L.R. (4th) 322 at paras. 18-19, RA vol. III tab 71. 167 BCSC Reasons para. 202, AR vol. I p. 55. -41 -

153. Finally, Descoteaux, Lavallee, Maranda and Foster Wheeler all demonstrate that a law office search is only permissible in the most exceptional individual circumstances, with prior judicial authorization, and subject to strict controls. Routine government access to client information in law offices, as authorized by the Regime, cannot meet this standard.

PART IV COSTS

154. The Respondent seeks its costs of the appeal, and the proceedings below.

PARTV ORDER SOUGHT

155. The Respondent seeks an order:

(a) Dismissing the appeal; and

(b) Answering the Constitutional Questions as set out in Part II of this factum.

ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 24th day of April, 2014

/ John J.L. ;Hunter, Q.C.

Counsel for the Federation of Law Societies of Canada -42-

PART VI LIST OF AUTHORITIES

Cases Paragraph

Alberta v. Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony, 2009 SCC 37, [2009] 2 S.C.R. 146 567

Anderson v. Bank ofBritish Columbia (1876), 2 Ch. D. 644 (C.A.) 107

Andrews v. Law Society ofBritish Columbia, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 143 84

Application under s. 83.28 ofthe Criminal Code (Re), 2004 SCC 42, [2004] 2 74, 76 S.C.R. 248

Balabel v. Air India, [1988] Ch. 317, [1988] 2 All E.R. 246 (C.A.) 128

Blankv. Canada (Department ofJustice), 2006 SCC 39, [2006] 2 S.C.R. 319 97, 107

Blood Tribe Department of Health v. Canada (Privacy Commissioner), 2008 105, 110-112, sec 44, [2008J 2 s.c.R. 574 114

British Columbia (Auditor General) v. British Columbia (Ministry of Attorney 113-114 General), 2013 BCSC 98, 40 B.C.L.R. (5th) 390

Camp Development Corp. v. South Coast Greater Vancouver Transportation 127 Authority, 2011 BCSC 88

Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford, 2013 SCC 72 62,67, 72

Canada (Attorney General) v. Law Society (British Columbia), [1982] 2 S.C.R. 81 307

Canada (Attorney General) v. PHS Community Services Society, 2011 SCC 44, 68, 74 [2011] 3 S.C.R. 134

Canada (Attorney General) v. Whaling, 2014 SCC 20 65

Canada (Prime Minister) v. Khadr, 2010 SCC 3, [2010] 1 S.C.R. 44 63, 75

Canada (Procureur general) c. Chambre des notaires du Quebec, 2014 QCCA 26, 65, 118, 552 130, 134, 142

Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law v. Canada (Attorney 72 General), 2004 SCC 4, [2004] 1 S.C.R. 76 - 43-

Cases Paragraph

Canadian National Railway Co. v. McKercher LLP, 2013 SCC 39, [2013] 2 91, 140 S.C.R. 649

Celanese Canada Inc. v. Murray Demolition Corp., 2006 SCC 36, [2006] 2 104 S.C.R. 189

Chambre des Notaires du Quebec c. Canada (Procureur general), 2010 QCCS 130 4215

Charkaoui v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2007 SCC 9, [2007] 1 68, 74, 85, S.C.R. 350 144

Cote v. Rancourt, 2004 SCC 58, [2004] 3 S.C.R. 248 85

Currie v. Symcor Inc. (2008), 244 O.A.C. 3 (C.A.) 128

Descoteaux v. Mierzwinski, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 860 97, 119, 137, 153

Donell v. GJB Enterprises Inc., 2012 BCCA 135,319 B.C.A.C. 17 118-119, 121

Federation of Law Societies of Canada v. Canada (Attorney General) (2002), 45 57 O.R. (3d) 383 (S.C.J.)

Federation of Law Societies of Canada v. Canada (Attorney General), [2001] 45 A.J. No. 1697 (Q.B.)

Federation of Law Societies of Canada v. Canada (Attorney General), 2002 45 NSSC 95, 203 N.S.R. (2d) 53

Federation of Law Societies of Canada v. Canada (Attorney General, 2002 45 SKQB 153, 218 Sask. R. 193

Finney v. Barreau du Quebec, 2004 SCC 36, [2004] 2 S.C.R. 17 84

Fortin v. Chretien, 2001 SCC 45, [2001] 2 S.C.R. 500 84

Foster Wheeler Power Co. v. Societe intermunicipale de gestion et 98, 102-103, d'elimination des dechets (SIGED) inc., 2004 SCC 18, [2004] 1 S.C.R. 456 127, 153

Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue), 2002 128 BCSC 1344, 6 B.C.L.R. (4th) 135

Greene v. Law Society ofBritish Columbia, 2005 BCSC 390, 40 B.C.L.R. (4th) 151 125 -44-

Cases Paragraph

Hausen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235 59

Hunter v. Southam, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 145 135

Kaiser (Re), 2012 ONCA 838, 300 O.A.C. 161 119, 121, 138

Lavallee, Racket & Heintz v. Canada (Attorney General), 2002 SCC 61, [2002] 26, 97, 106, 3 S.C.R. 209 115, 120, 134, 141-142, 144, 153

Law Society of British Columbia v. Canada (Attorney General), 2001 BCSC 44 1593, 98 B.C.L.R. (3d) 282

Law Society of British Columbia v. Canada (Attorney General), 2002 BCCA 45 49, 98 B.C.L.R. (3d) 310

Law Society ofBritish Columbia v. Mangat, 2001 SCC 67, [2001] 3 S.C.R. 113 84, 140

Little Sisters Book & Art Emporium v. Canada (Minister ofJustice), 2000 SCC 142 69, [2000] 2 S.C.R. 1120

MacDonald Estate v. Martin, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 1235 107-108

Maranda v. Richer, 2003 SCC 67, [2003] S.C.R. 193 98-99, 105, 100, 129-130, 138, 153

Newfoundland (I'reasury Board) v. N.A.P.E., 2004 SCC 66, [2004] 3 S.C.R. 146 381

Ontario (Ministry of Correctional Services) v. Goodis, 2006 SCC 31, [2006] 2 115 S.C.R. 32

Ontario (Public Safety and Security) v. Criminal Lawyers' Association, 2010 115 sec 23, [2010] 1 s.c.R. 815

Ott v. Fleishman (1983), 46 B.C.L.R. 321 (S.C.) 134

Patrick and Littleton (Re), 2006 QCCS 2276, [2006] Q.J. No. 3834 129

Pearlman v. Manitoba Law Society Judicial Committee, [1991] 2 S.C.R. 869 82

Pritchard v. Ontario (Human Rights Commission), 2004 SCC 31, [2004] 1 104 S.C.R. 809 -45-

Cases Paragraph

R. v. Campbell, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 565 107, 130

R. v. Cole, 2012 SCC 53, [2012] 3 S.C.R. 34 136

R. v. Cunningham, 2010 SCC 10, [2010] 1 S.C.R. 331 93

R. v. D. B., 2008 SCC 25, [2008] 2 S.C.R. 3 63-64, 75, 144

R. v. Demers, 2004 SCC 46, [2004] 2 S.C.R. 489 74

R. v. Edwards, [1996] 1 S.C.R. 128 133

R. v. G. D. B., 2000 SCC 22, [2000] 1 S.C.R. 520 74

R. v. Hebert, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 151 74

R. v. Heywood, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 761 74

R. v. Joanisse (1995), 85 O.A.C. 186 74,85

R. v. Lippe, [1991] 2 S.C.R. 114 84

R. v. Malmo-Levine, 2003 SCC 74, [2003] 3 S.C.R. 571 64,74-75

R. v. McClure, 2001 SCC 14, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 445 97, 107, 115

R. v. Neil, 2002 sec 70, [2002] 3 s.c.R. 631 88,92

R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103 55, 145-146

R. v. P. (MB.), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 555 74

R. v. R.D.S., [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484 74

R. v. vu, 2013 sec 60 136

Re B.C. Motor Vehicle Act, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 486 64, 72, 144

Reference re Remuneration of the Judges of the Provincial Court of Prince 76 Edward Island, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 3

RJR-MacDonald Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), [1995] 3 S.C.R. 199 146-147

Rodriguez v. British Columbia (Attorney General), [1993] 3 S.C.R. 519 72

Roncarelli v. Duplessis, [1959] S.C.R. 121 79 -46-

Cases Paragraph

Ruffo v. Conseil de la magistrature, [1995] 4 S.C.R. 267 74

Skogstad v. The Law Society of British Columbia, 2007 BCCA 310, 69 151 B.C.L.R. (4th) 322

Solosky v. The Queen, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 821 97

Suresh v. Canada, 2002 SCC 1, [2002] 1 S.C.R. 3 144

Vancouver Sun (Re), 2004 SCC 43, [2004] 2 S.C.R. 332 85

Vriend v. Alberta, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 493 147

Wood v. Schaeffer, 2013 SCC 71 65

Other Authorities Paragraph

Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.144/28/Rev.l 86 (1990)

First World Conference on the Independence of Justice, Montreal, 1983. SeeS. 87 Shetreet & J. Deschenes, eds., Judicial Independence: The Contemporary Debate (Boston: Martinus NijhoffPublishers, 1985)

G.D. Finlayson, "Self-Government of the legal profession-can it continue?" 85 (1985), 4 Advocates' Soc. J. No. 1, 11-16

H. Stewart, Fundamental Justice: Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights 73, 79 and Freedoms (Toronto: Irwin Law, 2012)

J. Giles, "The Independence ofthe Bar", (2001) 59 Advocate (B.C.) 549 78

M. Taylor, "The Independence ofthe Bar" (1981) Advocate (B.C.) 209 78

McLachlin C.J.C., "Professional Independence and the Rule of Law" (2007), 23 80, 85, 90 Windsor Rev. Legal & Soc. Issues 3

P. Monahan, "The Independence of the Bar as a Constitutional Principle in 77 Canada", in In the Public Interest: The Report and Research Papers of the Law Society of Upper Canada Task Force on the Rule ofLaw and the Independence ofthe Bar (Irwin Law, 2007) 117-149 at 148-149; see also pp. 117, 133

R. Peck, "The Independence ofthe Bar", in J. Giles, ed., The Splendour ofthe 78 Law: Allan McEachern- A Tribute to a Life in the Law (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 2001) -47-

Other Authorities Paragraph

T. Bingham, The Rule ofLaw (London: Allen Lane, 2010) 80

Task Force on the Rule of Law and the Independence of the Bar, "Protecting 79, 85 the Public through an Independent Bar: The Task Force Report", in In the Public Interest: The Report and Research Papers of the Law Society of Upper Canada Task Force on the Rule ofLaw and the Independence of the Bar (Irwin Law, 2007) 3-38 at 4-5

Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.l57/23, cl. 86 27 (1993), adopted by the U.N. World Conference on Human Rights

W. Lederman, "The Independence of the Judiciary" (1956) 34 Can. Bar Rev. 78 769 -48-

PART VII LEGISLATION

Tab Statutes

1. Bill C-31, Second Session, Forty-first Parliament, 62-63 Elizabeth II, 2013-2014, s. 287,291

2. Legal Profession Act, S.B.C. 1998, c. 9, s. 3

3. Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Suspicious Transaction Reporting Regulations, SOR/2001-317, s. 13

50886745 C-31 C-31

Second Session, Forty-first Parliament, Deux.ieme session, quarante et unieme legislature, 62-63 Elizabeth II, 2013-2014 62-63 Elizabeth II, 2013-2014

HOUSE OF COMMONS OF CANADA CHAMBREDESCOMMUNESDUCANADA

BILL C-31 PROJET DE LOI C-31

An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Loi portant execution de certaines dispositions du budget Parliament on February 11, 2014 and other measures depose au Parlement le 11 fevrier 2014 et mettant en oeuvre d'autres mesures

Fffi.ST READING, MARCH 28,2014 PREMIERE LECTURE LE 28 MARS 2014

MINISTER OF FINANCE MINISTRE DES FINANCES

90724 RECOMMENDATION RECOMMANDATION

His Excellency the Governor General recommends to the House of Son Excellence le gouverneur general recommande a Ia Chambre des Commons the appropriation of public revenue under the circumstances, in communes !'affectation de deniers publics dans les circonstances, de Ia maniere the manner and for the purposes set out in a measure entitled "An Act to et aux fins prevues dans une mesure intitulee « Loi portant execution de implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February certaines dispositions du budget depose au Parlement le 11 fevrier 2014 et 11, 2014 and other measures". mettant en oeuvre d'autres mesures ».

SUMMARY SOMMAIRE

Part 1 implements income tax measures and related measures proposed in the La partie I du texte met en oeuvre des mesures relatives a I'impot sur Je revenu February 11, 2014 budget. Most notably, it et des mesures connexes qui ont ett\ proposees dans le budget du 11 fevrier 2014 pour, notamment: (a) increases the maximum amount of eligible expenses for the adoption expense tax credit; a) hausser le plafond des depenses admissibles au credit d'impot pour frais d'adoption; (b) expands the list of expenses eligible for the medical expense tax credit to include the cost of the design of individualized therapy plans and costs b) ajouter a Ia liste des depenses admissibles au credit d'impot pour frais associated with service animals for people with severe diabetes; medicaux le coftt de Ia conception de plans de traitement personnalises et les coftts lies aux animaux d'assistance dresses pour aider les personnes atteintes (c) introduces the search and rescue volunteers tax credit; de diabi:te grave; (d) extends, for one year, the mineral exploration tax credit for flow-through · c) mettre en place le credit d'impot pour volontaires en recherche et share investors; sauvetage; (e) expands the circumstances in which members of underfunded pension d) prolonger d'une annee le credit d'impot pour )'exploration miniere pour plans can benefit from unreduced pension-to-RRSP transfer limits; les detenteurs d'actions accreditives; (j) eliminates the need for individuals to apply for the GST/HST credit and e) elargir les circonstances dans lesquelles les participants des regimes de allows the Minister of National Revenue to automaticallY determine if an a pension sous-capitalises peuvent Mneficier de plafonds non reduits pour les individual is eligible to receive the credit; transferts de prestations de retraite a des REER; (g) extends to 10 years the carry-forward period with respect to certain /) eliminer Ia necessite pour les particuliers de demander le credit d'impot donations of ecologically sensitive land; pour TPS!IVH et permettre au ministre du Revenu national de determiner (h) removes, for certified cultural property acquired as part of a gifting automatiquement si un particulier a droit au credit; arrangement that is a tax shelter, the exemption from the rule that deems the g) porter dix ans Ia periode de report prospectif relative certains dons de value of a gift to be no greater than its cost to the donor; a a fonds de terre ecosensibles; (z) allows the Minister of National Revenue to refuse to register, or revoke h) elirniner, I'egard de biens culturels certifies acquis dans le cadre d'un the registration of, a charity or Canadian amateur athletic association that a arrangement de don qui est un abri fiscal, I'exemption de Ia regie selon accepts a donation from a state supporter of terrorism; laquelle Ia valeur d 'un don est reputee ne pas etre superieure a son coftt pour (j) reduces, for certain small and medium-sized employers, the frequency of le donateur; remittances for source deductions; z) permettre au ministre du Revenu national de refuser d'enregistrer un (k) improves the Canada Revenue Agency's ability to provide feedback to organisme de bienfaisance ou une association canadienne enregistree de the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada; and sport amateur qui accepte un don d 'un Etat qui soutient le terrorisme, ou de revoquer son enregistrement; (l) requires a listing of outstanding tax measures to be tabled in Parliament. ;) reduire Ia frequence des versements de retenues a Ia source effectues par Part 1 also implements other selected income tax measures. Most notably, it certains petits et moyens employeurs; (a) introduces transitional rules relating to the labour-sponsored venture capital corporations tax credit;

Available on the Parliament of Canada Web Site at the following address: Disponible sur Je site Web du Parlement du Canada ill'adresse suivante: http://www.parl.gc.ca http://www.parl.gc.ca (b) requires certain financial intermediaries to report to the Canada Revenue k) ameliorer Ia capacite de I'Agence du revenu du Canada a fournir des Agency international electronic funds transfers of $10,000 or more; commentaires au Centre d'analyse des operations et declarations financieres du Canada; (c) makes amendments relating to the introduction of the Offshore Tax Informant Program of the Canada Revenue Agency; l) prevoir Je depot au Parlement d'une liste des mesures fiscales en instance. (d) permits the disclosure of taxpayer information to an appropriate police En outre, elle met en oeuvre d'autres mesures relatives a J'impot sur Je revenu organization in certain circumstances if the information relates to a serious pour, notamment: offence; and a) mettre en place des regles transitoires relatives au credit d'irnpot relatif (e) provides that the Business Development Bank of Canada and BDC aux societes a capital de risque de travailleurs; Capital Inc. are not financial institutions for the purposes of the Income Tax b) exiger de certains interrnediaires financiers qu'ils declarent J'Agence du Act's mark-to-market rules. a revenu du Canada les televirements internationaux de 10 000 $ ou plus; c) apporter des modifications decoulant de Ia mise sur pied du Programme de denonciateurs de l'inobservation fiscale a J'etranger de l'Agence du revenu du Canada; d) permettre que des renseignements confidentiels soient fournis a )'organisation de police competente dans certaines circonstances ou Jes renseignements ont trait a une infraction grave; e) prevoir que Ia Banque de developpement du Canada et Ia BDC Capital Inc. ne sont pas des institutions financieres pour !'application des regles de Ia Loi de l'impOt sur le revenu concernant Jes biens evalues a Ia valeur du marche. Part 2 implements certain goods and services tax/harmonized sales tax (GST/ La partie 2 met en oeuvre certaines mesures relatives a Ia taxesur Jes produits HST) measures proposed in the February 11, 2014 budget by et services et a Ia taxe de vente harrnonisee (TPSITVH) qui ont ete proposees dans Je budget du 11 fevrier 2014 pour, notamrnent: (a) expanding the GST/HST exemption for training that is specially designed to assist individuals with a disorder or disability to include the a) etendre !'exoneration de TPSffVH visant Ia formation conyue speciale service of designing such training; ment pour aider Jes particuliers ayant un trouble ou une deficience aux services de conception d'une telle formation; (b) expanding the GST/HST exemption for services rendered to individuals by certain health care practitioners to include professional services rendered b) etendre !'exoneration de TPSffVH visant Jes services rendus a des by acupuncturists and naturopathic doctors; particuliers par certains praticiens du domaine de Ia sante aux services professionnels rendus par les acupuncteurs et Jes docteurs en naturopathie; (c) adding eyewear specially designed to treat or correct a defect of vision by electronic means to the Jist of GST/HST zero-rated medical and assistive c) ajouter a Ia Jiste des appareils medicaux et appareils fonctionnels de~es devices; sous Je regime de Ia TPSffVH Jes appareils d'optique COllyUS specialement pour traiter ou corriger un trouble visuel par voie electronique; (d) extending to newly created members of a group the election that allows members of a closely-related group to not account for GST/HST on certain d) etendre aux membres d 'un groupe nouvellement crees le choix qui perrnet supplies between them, introducing joint and several (or solidary) liability aux membres d 'un groupe etroitement lie de ne pas tenir compte de Ia TPS/ for the parties to that election for any GST/HST liability on those supplies TVH sur certaines fournitures effectuees entre eux; faire en sorte que Jes and adding a requirement to ftle that election with the Canada Revenue parties a ce choix soient solidairement responsables du paiement de toute Agency; TPSffVH sur ces fournitures; et exiger que le forrnulaire concernant ce choix soit presente a l'Agence du revenu du Canada; (e) giving the Minister of National Revenue the discretionary authority to register a person for GST/HST purposes if the person fails to comply with e) confer~r au ministre du Revenu national le pouvoir discretionnaire the requirement to apply for registration, even after having been notified by d'inscrire sous le regime de Ia TPSffVH toute personne qui omet de se the Canada Revenue Agency of that requirement; and conformer a l'exigence d'inscription, meme apres avoir ete avisee de cette exigence par I' Agence du revenu du Canada; (j) improving the Canada Revenue Agency's ability to provide feedback to the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada. f) ameliorer Ia capacite de I'Agence du revenu du Canada a fournir des commentaires au Centre d'analyse des operations et declarations financieres du Canada. Part 2 also implements other GST/HST measures by En outre, elle met en oeuvre d'autres mesures relatives a Ia TPS/TVH pour, notamment: (a) providing a GST/HST exemption for supplies of hospital parking for patients and visitors, clarifying that the GST/HSTexemption for supplies of a a) exonerer de Ia TPSffVH les fournitures de stationnement des hOpitaux property, when all or substantially all of the supplies of the property by a pour Jes patients et Jes visiteurs; preciser que I' exoneration de TPSffVH charity are made for free, does not apply to paid parking and clarifying that visant Jes foumitures d'un bien-dans le cas ou Ia totalite ou Ia presque paid parking provided by charities that are set up or used by municipalities, totalite des fournitures du bien par un organisme de bienfaisance sont universities, public colleges, schools and hospitals to operate their parking effectuees gratuitement-ne s'applique pas au stationnement payant; et facilities does not qualify for the special GST/HST exemption for parking preciser que Je stationnernent payant offert par des organismes de supplied by charities; bienfaisance etablis ou utilises par des rnunicipalites, universites, colleges publics, ecoles ou hopitaux pour assurer I' exploitation de leurs pares de (b) clarifying that reports of international electronic funds transfers made to stationnement ne donne pas droit a I' exoneration Speciale de TPS!rVH qui the Canada Revenue Agency may be used for the purposes of the s'applique au stationnement fourni par des organismes de bienfais~ce; administration of the GST/HST; · (c) making amendments relating to the introduction of the Offshore Tax Informant Program of the Canada Revenue Agency; (d) permitting the disclosure of confidential GST/HST information to an b) preciser que les rapports sur Ies televirements intemationaux adresses a appropriate police organization in certain circumstances if the information l'Agence du revenu du Canada peuvent servir aux fms d'administration de Ia relates to a serious offence; and TPS!I'VH; (e) clarifying that a person cannot claim input tax credits in respect of an c) apporter des modifications decoulant de Ia mise sur pied du Programme amount of GST/HST that has already been recovered by the person from a de denonciateurs de l'inobservation fiscale a l'etranger de l'Agence du supplier. revenu du Canada; d) permettre que des renseignements confidentiels relatifs a Ia TPS!rVH soient foumis a I' organisation de police competente dans certaines circonstances ou les renseignements ont trait a une infraction grave; e) preciser qu'une personne ne peut demander de credits de taxe sur les intrants au titre de montants de TPS!rVH qu' elle a deja recouvres aupres d'un foumisseur. Part 3 implements excise measures proposed in the February II, 2014 budget La partie 3 met en oeuvre les mesures relatives a I'accise qui ont ete by proposees dans Ie budget du 11 fevrier 2014 pour: (a) adjusting the domestic rate of excise duty on tobacco products to account a) ajuster Ie taux sur Je marche interieur du droit d'accise sur Jes produits du for inflation and eliminating the preferential excise duty treatment of tobacco tabac pour tenir compte de !'inflation et abolir Je regime de droit d'accise products available through duty free markets; preferentiel applicable aux produits du tabac sur les marches hors taxes; (b) ensuring that excise tax returns are filed accurately through the addition b) veiller a Ia production de declarations de taxe d'accise exactes par l'ajout of a new administrative monetary penalty and an amended criminal offence d'une penalite administrative pecuniaire en cas de faux enonces ou for the making of false statements or omissions, consistent with similar d'omissions et par Ia modification des dispositions relatives a !'infraction provisions in the GST/HST portion of the Excise Tax Act; and criminelle prevue dans ce cas, en harmonie avec des dispositions similaires de Ia partie de Ia Loi sur Ia taxe d'accise qui porte sur Ia TPS!I'VH; (c) improving the Canada Revenue Agency's ability to provide feedback to the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada. c) ameliorer Ia capacite de l'Agence du revenu du Canada a foumir des commentaires au Centre d' analyse des operations et declarations fmancieres du Canada. Part 3 also implements other excise measures by En outre, elle met en oetJvre d'autres mesures relatives a I'accise pour: (a) permitting the disclosure of confidential information to an appropriate a) permettre que des renseignements confidentiels soient fournis a police organization in certain circumstances if the information relates to a !'organisation de police competente dans certaines circonstances ou Ies serious offence; and renseignements ont trait a une infraction grave; (b) making amendments relating to the introduction of the Offshore Tax b) apporter des modifications decoulant de Ia mise sur pied du Programme Informant Program of the Canada Revenue Agency. de denonciateurs de l'inobservation fiscale a I' etranger de I' Agence du revenu du Canada. In addition, Part 3 amends the Air Travellers Security Charge Act, the Excise Enfin, elle modifie Ia Loi sur /e droit pour Ia securite des passagers du Act, 2001 and the Excise Tax Act to clarify that reports of international transport aerien, Ia Loi de 2001 sur /'accise et Ia Loi sur Ia taxe d'accise afin electronic funds transfers made to the Canada Revenue Agency may be used for de preciser que les rapports sur les televirements intemationaux adresses a the purposes of the administration of those Acts. 1' Agence du revenu du Canada peuvent servir aux fins d'application de ces lois. Part 4 amends the Customs Tariff. In particular, it La partie 4 modifie le Tarif des douanes afm, notamment: (a) reduces the Most-Favoured-Nation rates of duty and, if applicable, rates a) de reduire Ies taux de Ia nation Ia plus favorisee et, s'il y a lieu, Ies taux of duty under the other tariff treatments on tariff items related to mobile des autres traitements tarifaires a l'egard des nurneros tarifaires relatifs aux offshore drilling units used in oil and gas exploration and development that unites mobiles de forage au large utilisees ades fins d' exploration et de mise are imported on or after May 5, 2014; en valeur d 'hydrocarbures qui soot importees a compter du 5 mai 20 14; (b) removes the exemption provided by tariff item 9809.00.00 and makes b) d'eliminer !'exoneration accordee aux termes du numero tarifaire consequential amendments to tariff item 9833.00.00 to apply the same tariff 9809.00.00 et d'apporter des modifications correlatives au numero tarifaire rules to the Governor General that are applied to other public office holders; 9833.00.00 afin que le gouverneur general soit assujetti aux memes regles and tarifaires que Ies autres titulaires d 'une charge publique; (c) clarifies the tariff classification of certain imported food products, c) de preciser Ia classification tarifaire de certains produits alimentaires effective November 29, 2013. importes applicable a compter du 29 novembre 2013. Part 5 enacts the Canada-United States Enhanced Tax Information La partie 5 met en oeuvre Ia Loi de mise en oeuvre de /'Accord Canada Exchange Agreement Implementation Act and amends the Income Tax Act to Etats-Unis pour un meil/eur echange de renseignements fiscaux et modifie Ia introduce consequential information reporting requirements. Loi de I 'impot sur /e revenu pour y ajouter des exigences correlatives en matiere de declaration de renseignements. Part 6 enacts and amends several Acts in order to implement various La partie 6 met en oeuvre diverses mesures, no!anlment par I' Miction et Ia measures. modification de plusieurs lois. Division I of Part 6 provides for payments to compensate for deductions in La section I de Ia partie 6 prevoit le versement de sommes pour compenser certain benefits and allowances that are payable under the Canadian Forces Jes deductions faites a certaines allocations et prestations dues au titre de Ia Loi Members and Veterans Re-establishment and Compensation Act, the War sur /es mesures de reinsertion et d 'indemnisation des mi/itaires et veterans des Veterans Allowance Act and the Civilian War-related Benefits Act. Forces canadiennes, de Ia Loi sur les allocations aux anciens combattants et de Ia Loi sur /es prestations de guerre pour /es civils. Division 2 of Part 6 amends the Bank ofCanada Act and the Canada Deposit La section 2 de Ia partie 6 modi:fie Ia Loi sur Ia Banque du Canada et Ia Loi Insurance Corporation Act to authorize the Bank of Canada to provide banking sur Ia Societe d'assurance-depots du Canada a:fin d'autoriser Ia Banque du and custodial services to the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation. Canada a foumir des services bancaires et de depot de biens a Ia Societe d 'assurance-depots du Canada. Division 3 of Part 6 amends the Hazardous Products Act to better regulate La section 3 de Ia partie 6 modi:fie Ia Loi sur les produits dangereux a:fin de the sale and importation of hazardous products intended for use, handling or mieux encadrer Ia vente et !'importation de produits dangereux destines a etre storage in a work place in Canada in accordance with the Regulatory utilises, manutentionnes ou stockes dans des lieux de travail au Canada, Cooperation Council Joint Action Plan initiative for work place chemicals. In conformement a !'initiative sur les produits chirniques dans les lieux de travail particular, the amendments implement the Globally Harmonized System of decrite dans le Plan d'action conjoint du Conseil de cooperation en matiere de Classification and Labelling of Chemicals with respect to, among other things, reglementation. Les modifications mettent notamment en oeuvre le Systeme labelling and safety data sheet requirements. It also provides for enhanced general de classification et d'etiquetage des produits chimiques, en ce qui a powers related to administration and enforcement Finally, it makes amend trait, entre autres, aux exigences relatives aux etiquettes et aux :fiches de ments to the Canada Labour Code and the Hazardous Materials Information donnees de securite. Le texte modifie egalement Ia loi a:fin de prevoir des Review Act. pouvoirs accrus en matiere d'execution et de controle d'application. Enfm, il apporte des modifications au Code canadien du travail et li Ia Loi sur /e controle des renseignements relatifs aux matieres dangereuses. Division 4 of Part 6 amends the Importation of Intoxicating Liquors Act to La section 4 de Ia partie 6 modifie Ia Loi sur /'importation des boissons authorize individuals to transport beer and spirits from one province to another enivrantes a:fin d'autoriser les particuliers li transporter de Ia biere et des for their personal consumption. spiritueux d'une province a une autre pour leur consommation personnelle. Division 5 of Part 6 amends the Judges Act to increase the number of judges La section 5 de Ia partie 6 rnodifie Ia Loi sur les juges a:fin d'augmenter le of the Superior Court of Quebec and the Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta. nombre des juges de Ia Cour superieure du Quebec et de Ia Cour du Bane de Ia Reine de I'Alberta Division 6 ofPart 6 amends the Members ofParliament Retiring Allowances La section 6 de Ia partie 6 rnodifie Ia Loi sur les allocations de retraite des Act to prohibit parliamentarians from contributing to their pension and accruing parlementaires afm d'interdire aux parlementaires de cotiser li leur pension ou pensionable service as a result of a suspension. d'accurnuler du service validable a Ia suite d'une suspension. Division 7 of Part 6 amends the National Defence Act to recognize the La section 7 de Ia partie 6 rnodifie Ia Loi sur Ia defense nationale afm de historic names of the Royal Canadian Navy, the Canadian Army and the Royal reconna1tre les noms historiqucs de Ia Marine royale canadienne, de I' Armee Canadian Air For~.e while preserving the integration and the unifk.ation canadienne et de !'Aviation royalc canadienne tout en preservant I' integration et achieved under the Canadian Forces Reorganization Act and to provide that the !'unification realisees en vertu de Ia Loi sur Ia reorganisation des Forces designations of rank and the circumstances of their use are prescribed in canadiennes et a:fin que les designations de grade et leur cas d'emploi soient regulations made by the Governor in Council. fixes par reglement du gouverneur en conseil. Division 8 of Part 6 amends the Customs Act to extend to 90 days the time La section 8 de Ia partie 6 modifie Ia Loi sur les douanes afm de prolonger a ·for making a request for a review of a seizure, ascertained forfeiture or penalty quatre-vingt-dix jours le delai pour presenter une demande de revision d'une assessment and to provide that requests for a review and third-party claims can saisie, d'une confiscation compensatoire ou d'une penalite ainsi que de be made directly to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness. pennettre que les demandes de revision et de revendication des tiers puissent etre presentees directernent au rninistre de Ia Securite publique et de Ia Protection civile. Division 9 of Part 6 amends the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency Act La section 9 de Ia partie 6 rnodifie Ia Loi sur l'Agence de promotion to provide for the dissolution of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Board and to economique du Canada atlantique pour dissoudre le Conseil de promotion repeal the requirement for the President of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities econornique du Canada atlantique et abroger I'obligation du president de Agency to submit a comprehensive report every :five years on the Agency's presenter tous les cinq ans un rapport global d'evaluation des activites de activities and on the impact those activities have had on regional disparity. I'Agence et de leurs effets sur les disparites regionales. Division 10 of Part 6 dissolves the Enterprise Cape Breton Corporation and La section 10 de Ia partie 6 prevoit Ia dissolution de Ia Societe d' expansion authorizes, among other things, the transfer of its assets and obligations, as well du Cap-Breton et elle autorise notamment le transfert de ses elements d'actif et as those of its subsidiaries, to either the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency obligations ainsi que de ceux de ses filiales a I'Agence de promotion or Her Majesty in right of Canada as represented by the Minister of Public econornique du Canada atlantique ou a Sa Majeste du chef du Canada, Works and Government Services. It also provides that the employees of the representee par le ministre des Travaux publics et des Services gouvernemen Corporation and its subsidiaries are deemed to have been appointed under the taux. Elle prevoit en outre que Jes employes de Ia Societe et de ses filiales sont Public Service Employment Act and includes provisions related to their terms reputes etre nornmes en vertu de Ia Loi sur l'emploi dans lafonction publique et and conditions of employment. Furthermore, it amends the Atlantic Canada elle cornporte des dispositions relatives li leurs conditions d'ernploi. Elle Opportunities Agency Act to, among other things, confer on the Atlantic modifie Ia Loi sur l'Agence de promotion economique du Canada atlantique, Canada Opportunities Agency the authority that is necessary for the notamrnent pour conferer li l'Agence de promotion economique du Canada administration, management, control and disposal of the assets and obligations atlantique les pouvoirs necessaires pour controler et gerer les el6ments d'actif et transferred to the Agency. It also makes consequential amendments to other obligations qui lui sont transferes et en disposer. Enfm, elle apporte des Acts and repeals the Enterprise Cape Breton Corporation Act. modifications correlatives a d'autres lois et abroge Ia Loi sur Ia Societe d'expansion du Cap-Breton. Division 11 of Part 6 provides for the transfer of responsibility for the La section 11 de Ia partie 6 prevoit que Ia responsabilite de !'administration administration of the programs known as the "Online Works of Reference" and des programmes appeles « Ouvrages de reference en ligne » et « Musee virtue! the "Vrrtual Museum of Canada" from the Minister of Canadian Heritage to the du Canada » est transferee du ministre du Patrirnoine canadien au Musee Canadian Museum of History. canadien de l'histoire. Division 12 of Part 6 amends the Nordion and Theratronics Divestiture La section 12 de Ia partie 6 rnodifie Ia Loi autorisant /'alienation de Nordion Authorization Act to remove certain restrictions on the acquisition of voting et de Theratronics afin d' eliminer certaines restrictions applicables a shares of Nordion. !'acquisition d'actions avec droit de vote de Nordion. Division 13 of Part 6 amends the Bank Act to add regulation-making powers La section 13 de Ia partie 6 modifie Ia Loi sur les banques pour y ajouter le respecting a bank's activities in relation to derivatives and benchmarks. pouvoir de reglementer les activites des banques lil\es aux instruments derives et aux indices de reference. Division 14 of Part 6 amends the Insurance Companies Act to broaden the La section 14 de la partie 6 modifie Ia Loi sur les societes d'assurances afin Governor in Council's authority to make regulations respecting the conversion de conferer au gouverneur en conseil des pouvoirs n\glementaires elargis en ce of a mutual company into a company with common shares. qui concerne Ia transformation de societes mutuelles en societes avec actions ordinaires. Division 15 of Part 6 amends the Motor Vehicle Safety Act to support the La section 15 de Ia partie 6 modifie Ia Loi sur Ia securite automobile en vue objectives of the Regulatory Cooperation Council to enhance the alignment of de favoriser, tout en protegeant les Canadiens, Ia realisation des objectifs du Canadian and U.S. regulations while protecting Canadians. It introduces Conseil de cooperation en matiere de reglementation relatifs a !'harmonisation measures to accelerate and streamline the regulatory process, reduce the des reglements americains et canadiens. Bile prevoit des mesures qui permettent administrative burden for manufacturers and importers and improve safety for d' accelerer et de rationaliser le processus reglementaire, de reduire le fardeau Canadians through revised oversight procedures and enhanced availability of administratif des fabricants et des importateurs et d'ameliorer Ia securite des vehicle safety information. Canadiens grace a des procedures de surveillance revisees et aune disponibilite accrue des renseignements en matiere de securite automobile. The amendments to the Railway Safety Act and the Transportation of Cette section abroge des dispositions de Ia Loi sur Ia securite ferroviaire et Dangerous Goods Act, 1992 modernize the legislation by aligning it with the de Ia Loi de 1992 sur le transport des marchandises dangereuses afin de Cabinet Directive on Regulatory Management moderniser Ia legislation pour qu'elle tienne compte de Ia Directive du Cabinet sur Ia gestion de Ia reglementation. This Division also amends the Safe Food for Canadians Act to authorize the Cette section modifie egalement Ia Loi sur Ia salubrite des aliments au Governor in Council to make regulations respecting activities related to Canada afin de donner au gouverneur en conseil le pouvoir de prendre des specified fresh fruits and vegetables, including requiring a person who engages reglements en vue de regir les activites relatives aux fruits et legumes :frais, in certain activities to be a member of a specified entity or organization. It also notamment d'exiger que seuls les membres d'une entite ou d'un organisme repeals the Board of Arbitration. designes exercent ces activites. Entin, elle supprime le Conseil d'arbitrage. Division 16 of Part 6 amends the Telecommunications Act to set a maximum La section 16 de Ia partie 6 modifie Ia Loi sur les telecommunications afin de amount that a Canadian carrier can charge to another Canadian carrier for fixer un plafond a Ia somme qu'une entreprise canadienne peut exiger d'une certain roaming services. autre entreprise canadienne pour certains services d'itinerance. Division 17 of Part 6 amends the Canada Labour Code to allow employees La section 17 de Ia partie 6 modifie le Code canadien du travail pour to interrupt their compassionate care leave or leave related to their child's permettre aux employes d'interrompre un conge de soignant, un conge en cas critical illness, death or disappearance in order to take leave because of sickness de maladie grave d'un enfant ou un conge en cas de deces ou de disparition or a work-related illness or injury. It also amends the Employment Insurance d'un enfant, afin de prendre un conge de maladie ou un conge lie a un accident Act to facilitate access to sickness benefits for claimants who are in receipt of de travail ou a une maladie professionnelle. Bile modifie egalement Ia Loi sur compassionate care benefits or benefits for parents of critically ill children. l'assurance-emploi afm de faciliter l'acces ades prestations de maladie pour les prestataires qui beneficient de prestations de soignant ou de prestations pour parents d'enfants gravement malades. Division 18 of Part 6 amends the Canadian Food Inspection Agency Act to La section 18 de Ia partie 6 modifie Ia Loi sur I'Agence canadienne provide that fees fixed under that Act for the use of a facility provided by the d'inspection des aliments afin d'exempter des exigences prevues a Ia Loi sur les Canadian Food Inspection Agency under the Safe Food for Canadians Act as frais d'utilisation les prix fixes pour Ia fourniture de services, d'installations ou well as fees fixed for services, products and rights and privileges provided by de produits ou pour I' attribution de droits ou d' avantages par I' Agence the Agency under that Act are exempt from the application of the User Fees canadienne d'inspection des aliments en vertu de Ia Loi sur Ia salubrite des Act. aliments au Canada. Division 19 of Part 6 amends the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) La section 19 de Ia partie 6 modi fie Ia Loi sur le recyclage des produits de Ia and Terrorist Financing Act to, among other things, enhance the client criminalite et le jinancement des activites terroristes, notamment en vue identification, record keeping and registration requirements for fmancial d'accroitre les obligations des institutions financieres et des intermediaires en institutions and intermediaries, refer to online casinos, and extend the ce qui concerne Ia verification de l'identite des clients, Ia tenue de documents et application of the Act to persons and entities that deal in virtual currencies !'inscription des personnes et entites qui se Iivrent au commerce de Ia monnaie and foreign money services businesses. Furthermore, it makes modifications in virtuelle et aux entreprises de services monetaires etrangeres et pour mentionner regards to the information that the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis les casinos en ligne dans Ia loi. Bile prevoit des modifications quant aux Centre of Canada may receive, collect or disclose, and expands the renseignements que le Centre d'analyse des operations et declarations circumstances in which the Centre or the Canada Border Services Agency financieres du Canada peut recevoir, recueillir ou communiquer et ajoute des can disclose information received or collected under the Act. It also updates the circonstances dans lesquelles le Centre et I'Agence des services frontaliers du review and appeal provisions related to cross-border currency reporting and Canada peuvent Ies communiquer sous le regime de Ia loi. Bile met ajour les brings Part 1.1 of the Act into force. dispositions de revision et d' appel relatives au programme de declaration des mouvements transfrontaliers des devises et prevoit !'entree en vigueur de Ia Partie 1.1 de Ia loi. Division 20 of Part 6 amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act La section 20 de Ia partie 6 modifie Ia Loi sur I 'immigration et Ia protection and the Economic Action Plan 2013 Act, No. 2 to, among other things, des n3fugies et Ia Loi no 2 sur le plan d'action economique de 2013 afin, notamment: (a) require certain applications to be made electronically; a) d' exiger que certaines demandes soient faites electroniquement; (b) provide for the making of regulations regarding the establishment of a system of administrative· monetary penalties for the contravention of b) de permettre Ia prise de reglements relatifs a l'etablissement d'un regime conditions applicable to employers hiring foreign workers; de sanctions administratives pecuniaires applicable aux cas de non-respect des conditions imposees aux employeurs de travailleurs etrangers; (c) provide for the termination of certain applications for permanent c) de mettre fin a certaines demandes de residence permanente n'ayant pas, residence in respect of which a decision as to whether the selection criteria avant le II fevrier 2014, fait !'objet d'une decision quanta Ia confonnite aux are met is not made before February 11, 2014; and - criteres de selection; (d) clarify and strengthen requirements related to the expression of interest d) de clarifier et de renforcer les exigences concernant le regime de regime. declaration d'interet. Division 21 of Part 6 amends the Public Service Labour Relations Act to La section 21 de Ia partie 6 modifie Ia Loi sur les relations de travail dans Ia clarify that an adjudicator may grant systemic remedies when it has been fonction publique afin de clarifier les pouvoirs de l'arbitre, Jorsqu'il est determined that the employer has engaged in a discriminatory practice. determine que I' employeur a commis un acte discriminatoire, en lui permettant I'octroi de mesures de redressement systemiques. It also clarifies the transitional provisions in respect of essential services that were enacted by the Economic Action Plan 2013 Act, No. 2. En outre, elle clarifie les dispositions transitoires edictees par Ia Loi n° 2 sur le plan d'action economique de 2013 qui visent les services essentiels. Division 22 of Part 6 amends the Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge La section 22 de Ia partie 6 modifie Ia Loi de 2006 sur les droits Act, 2006 to clarify how payments to provinces under section 99 of that Act are d'exportation de produits de bois d'oeuvre afin de clarifier Ia fa9on dont les to be determined. paiements aux provinces au titre de !'article 99 de cette Joi sont calcules. Division 23 of Part 6 amends the Budget Implementation Act, 2009 so that La section 23 de Ia partie 6 modifie Ia Loi d'execution du budget de 2009 de the aggregate amount of payments to provinces and territories for matters fa90n a permettre que soit fixe par Joi de credits Je montant total des paiements relating to the establishment of a Canadian securities regulation regime may be a des provinces et a des territoires au titre de mesures liees a l'etablissement fixed through an appropriation Act. d'un regime canadien de reglementation des valeurs mobilieres. Division 24 of Part 6 amends the Protection of Residential Mortgage or La section 24 de Ia partie 6 modifie Ia Loi sur Ia protection de /'assurance Hypothecary Insurance Act and the National Housing Act to provide that hypothecaire residentielle et Ia Loi nationale sur /'habitation afm de prevoir certain criteria established in a regulation may apply to an existing insured que certains criteres fixes par reglement peuvent s'appliquer a un pret mortgage or hypothecary loan. hypothecaire assure existant Division 25 of Part 6 amends the Trade-marks Act to, among other things, La section 25 de Ia partie 6 modifie Ia Loi sur les marques de commerce afin make that Act consistent with the Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks notamment de J'harrnoniser avec le Traite de Singapour sur Je droit des marques and add the authority to make regulations for carrying into effect the Protocol et d'y ajouter le pouvoir de prendre des reglements en vue de mettre en oeuvre Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of le Protocole relatif a !'Arrangement de Madrid concernant !'enregistrement Marks. The amendments include the simplification of the requirements for international des marques. Les modifications ont entre autres pour objet de obtaining a filing date in relation to an application for the registration of a trade simplifier les exigences pour obtenir une date de production relativement aune mark, the elimination of the requirement to declare use of a trade-mark before demande d'enregistrement d'une marque de commerce, d'eliminer !'obligation registration, the reduction of the term of registration of a trade-mark from 15 to de declarer I'emploi de Ia marque de commerce avant son enregistrement, de I 0 years, and the adoption of the classification established by the Nice reduire de quinze a dix ans Ia duree de !'enregistrement d'une marque de Agreement Concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services commerce et d'adopter Ia classification instituee par I'Arrangement de Nice for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks. concernant Ia classification internationale des produits et des services aux fins de !'enregistrement des marques. Division 26 of Part 6 amends the Trade-marks Act to repeal the power to La section 26 de Ia partie 6 modifie Ia Loi sur les marques de commerce afin appoint the Registrar of Trade-marks and to provide that the Registrar is the d' abroger le pouvoir de nommer un registraire des marques de commerce et de person appointed as Commissioner of Patents under subsection 4(1) of the prevoir que le titulaire du poste de registraire est Je commissaire aux brevets Patent Act. nomme en vertu du paragraphe 4(1) de Ia Loi sur les brevets. Division 2 7 of Part 6 amends the Old Age Security Act to prevent the La section 27 de Ia partie 6 modifie Ia Loi sur Ia securite de Ia vieillesse afin payment of Old Age Security income-tested benefits for the entire period of a d' empecher Je versement de prestations de Ia securite de Ia vieillesse fondees sponsorship undertaking by removing the current 10-year cap. sur Je revenu pendant toute Ia duree de I' engagement de parrainage en supprimant Je plafond actuel de dix ans. Division 28 of Part 6 enacts the New Bridge for the St. Lawrence Act, La section 28 de ]a partie 6 edicte Ia Loi visant le nouveau pont pour le Saint respecting the construction and operation of a new bridge in Montreal to Laurent et vise Ia construction et I' exploitation d'un nouveau pont a Montreal replace the Champlain Bridge and the Nuns' Island Bridge. pour remplacer le pont Champlain et Je pont de 1'lle des Soeurs. Division 29 of Part 6 enacts the Administrative Tribunals Support Service of La section 29 de Ia partie 6 edicte Ia Loi sur le Service canadien d'appui aux Canada Act, which establishes the Administrative Tribunals Support Service of tribunaux administratifs, Jaquelle constitue le Service canadien d'appui aux Canada (ATSSC) as a portion of the federal public administration. The ATSSC tribunaux administratifs (SCATA) en tant que secteur de 1' administration becomes the sole provider of resources and staff for II administrative tribunals publique federale. Le SCAT'A devient le seul foumisseur de ressources et de and provides facilities and support services to those tribunals, including personnel pour II tribunaux administratifs. ll fournit aceux-ci des installations registry, administrative, research and analysis services. The Division also et divers services d'appui, notamment des services de greffe et des services makes consequential amendments to the Acts establishing those tribunals and admiuistratifs, de recherche et d'analyse. La section apporte egalement des to other Acts related to those tribunals. modifications correlatives aux lois constitutives eta d'autres lois relatives aces tribunaux. Division 30 of Part 6 enacts the Apprentice Loans Act, which provides for La section 30 de Ia partie 6 edicte Ia Loi sur les prets aux apprentis. Cette loi financial assistance for apprentices to help with the cost of their training. Under prevoit une aide financiere pOUr aider Jes apprentis a defrayer Je C01It de leur that Act, apprentices registered in eligible trades will be eligible for loans that formation. En vertu de cette loi, les apprentis inscrits dans un metier admissible will be interest-free until their training ends. seront admissibles a des prets exempts d'interet jusqu'a ce qu'ils cessent leur formation.

TABLE OF PROVISIONS TABLE ANALYTIQUE

AN ACT TO IMPLEMENT CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF LOI PORTANT EXECUTION DE CERTAINES THE BUDGET TABLED IN PARLIAMENT ON DISPOSffiONS DU BUDGET DEPOSE AU PARLEMENT FEBRUARY 11, 2014 AND OTHER MEASURES LE 11 FEVRIER 2014 ET METTANT EN OEUVRE D'AUTRES MESURES

SHORT TITLE TITRE ABREGE 1. Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 1 1. Loi n° 1 sur le plan d'action economique de 2014

PART1 PARTIE 1 AMENDMENTS TO THE INCOME TAX ACT AND TO MODIFICATION DE LA LOI DE L'IMPOT SUR LE REVENU RELATED LEGISLATION ET DE TEXTES CONNEXES 2-39. 2-39.

PART2 PARTIE 2 AMENDMENTS TO THE EXCISE TAX ACT (GST/HST MODIFICATION DE LA LOI SUR LA TAXE D'ACCISE MEASURES) (MESURES RELATIVES A LA TPSfi'VH) 40-61. 40-61.

PART3 PARTIE 3 AMENDMENTS TO THE EXCISE ACT, 2001, THE EXCISE MODIFICATION DE LA LOI DE 2001 SUR L'ACCISE, DE LA TAX ACT (OTHER THAN GST/HST MEASURES) AND THE LOI SUR LA TAXE D'ACCISE (SAUF LES DISPOSITIONS AIR TRAVELLERS SECURITY CHARGE ACT CONCERNANT LA TPS!fVH) ET DE LA LOI SUR LE DROIT POUR LA SECURITE DES PASSAGERS DU TRANSPORT AERIEN 62-90. 62-90.

PART4 PARTIE 4 CUSTOMS TARIFF TARIF DES DOUANES 91-98. 91-98.

PARTS PARTIE 5 CANADA-UNITED STATES ENHANCED TAX LOI DE MISE EN OEUVRE DEL'ACCORD CANADA-ETATS INFORMATION EXCHANGE AGREEMENT UNIS POUR UN MEILLEUR ECHANGE DE IMPLEMENTATION ACT RENSEIGNEMENTS FISCAUX 99. Enactment of Act 99. Ediction de Ia loi

AN ACT TO IMPLEMENT THE CANADA-UNITED STATES LOI METTANT EN OEUVRE L'ACCORD CANADA-ETATS- ENHANCED TAX INFORMATION EXCHANGE AGREEMENT UNIS POUR UN MEILLEUR ECHANGE DE RENSEIGNEMENTS FISCAUX 1. Canada-United States Enhanced Tax Information Exchange 1. Loi de mise en oeuvre de !'Accord Canada-Etats-Unis pour Agreement Implementation Act un meilleur echange de renseignements fiscaux 2. Defmition of "Agreement" 2. Definition de «Accord» ii

3. Agreement approved 3. Approbation 4. Inconsistent Jaws-general rule 4. Incompatibilite-principe 5. Regulations 5. Reglements 6. Entry into force of Agreement 6. Entree en vigueur de I'Accord 100-101. 100-101.

PART6 PARTIE 6 VARIOUS MEASURES DIVERSES MESURES

DIVISION 1 SECTION 1 PAYMENTS-VETERANS AFFAIRS PAIEMENTS-ANCIENS COMBATTANTS 102-107. 102-107.

DIVISION 2 SECTION 2 CANADA DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION SOCIETE D'ASSURANCE-DJI;p6TS DU CANADA 108-109. 108-109.

DMSION 3 SECTION 3 REGULATORY COOPERATION COUNCIL lNITIATIVE ON INITIATIVE DU CONSEIL DE COOPERATION EN MATIERE DE WORKPLACE CHEMICALS REGLEMENTATION CONCERNANT LES PRODUITS CHIMIQUES DANS LES LIEUX DE TRAVAIL 110-162. 110-162.

DIVISION 4 SECTION 4 IMPORTATION OF INTOXICATING LIQUORS ACT LOI SUR L'IMPORTATION DES BOISSONS ENIVRANTES 163. 163.

DMSION5 SECTION 5 JUDGES ACT LOI SUR LES JUGES 164-165. 164-165.

DMSION 6 SECTION 6 MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT RETIRING ALLOWANCES ACT LOI SURLES ALLOCATIONS DE RETRAITE DES PARLEMENTAIRES 166-167. 166-167.

DMSION 7 SECTION 7 NATIONAL DEFENCE ACT LOI SUR LA DEFENSE NATIONALE 168-171. 168-171.

DMSION 8 SECTION 8 CUSTOMS ACT LOI SUR LES DOUANES 172-174. 172-174. iii

DIVISION 9 SECTION 9 ATLANTIC CANADA OPPORTUNITIES AGENCY AGENCE DE PROMOTION ECONOMIQUE DU CANADA ATLANTIQUE 175-178. 175-178.

DIVISION 10 SECTION 10 ENTERPRISE CAPE BRETON CORPORATION SOCIETE D'EXPANSION DU CAP-BRETON 179-192. 179-192.

DIVISION 11 SECTION 11 MUSEUMS ACT LOI SUR LES MUSEES 193-205. 193-205.

DIVISION 12 SECTION 12 NORDION AND THERATRONICS DIVESTITURE AUTHORIZATION LOI AUTORISANT L'ALIENATION DE NORDION ET DE ACT THERATRONICS 206-209. 206-209.

DIVISION 13 SECTION 13 BANK ACT LOI SUR LES BANQUES 210. 210.

DIVISION 14 SECTION 14 INSURANCE COMPANIES ACT LOI SUR LES SOCIETES D'ASSURANCES 211. 211.

DIVISION 15 SECTION 15 REGULATORY COOPERATION COOPERATION EN MATIERE DE REGLEMENTATION 212-238. 212-238.

DIVISION 16 SECTION 16 TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT LOI SUR LES TELECOMMUNICATIONS 239-241. 239-241.

DIVISION 17 SECTION 17 SICKNESS BENEFITS PRESTATIONS DE MALADIE 242-251. 242-251.

DIVISION 18 SECTION 18 CANADIAN FOOD INSPECTION AGENCY ACT LOI SUR L'AGENCE CANADIENNE D'INSPECTION DES ALIMENTS 252-253. 252-253. iv

DIVISION 19 SECTION 19 MONEY LAUNDERING AND TERRORIST FINANCING RECYCLAGE DES PRODUITS DE LA CRIMINALITE ET FINANCEMENT DES ACfiVITES TERRORISTES 254-298. 254-298.

DIVISION 20 SECfiON 20 IMMIGRATION IMMIGRATION 299-307. 299-307.

DIVISION 21 SECTION 21 PUBLIC SERVICE LABOUR RELATIONS RELATIONS DE TRAVAIL DANS LA FONCTION PUBLIQUE 308-310. 308-310.

DIVISION 22 SECTION 22 SOFTWOOD LUMBER PRODUCTS EXPORT CHARGE ACT, 2006 LOI DE 2006 SUR LES DROITS D'EXPORTATION DE PRODUITS DE BOIS D'OEUVRE 311-312. 311-312.

DIVISION 23 SECTION 23 BUDGET IMPLEMENTATION ACT, 2009 LOI D'ExECUTION DU BUDGET DE 2009 313. 313.

DIVISION 24 SECTION 24 SECURITIZATION OF INSURED MORTGAGE OR HYPOTHECARY TITRISATION DE PRETS HYPOTli:ECAIRES ASSURES LOANS 314-316. 314-316.

DIVISION 25 SECfiON 25 AMENDMENTS RELATING TO INTERNATIONAL TREATIES ON MODIFICATIONS LIEES AUX. TRAITES INTERNATIONAUX SURLES TRADEMARKS MARQUES DE COMMERCE 317-368. 317-368.

DIVISION 26 SECTION 26 REDUCTION OF GOVERNOR IN COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS MESURE DE REDUCTION DES POSTES POURVUS PAR LE GOUVERNEUR EN CONSEIL 369-370. 369-370.

DIVISION 27 SECTION 27 OLD AGE SECURITY ACT LOI SUR LA SECURITE DE LA VIEILLESSE 371-374. 371-374. v

DMSION 28 SECTION 28 NEW BRIDGE FOR THE ST. LAWRENCE ACT LOI VISANT LE NOUVEAU PONT POUR LE SAINT-LAURENT 375. Enactment of Act 375. Ediction de Ia loi

AN ACT RESPECTING A NEW BRIDGE IN MONTREAL TO LOI VISANT UN NOUVEAU PONT A MONTR.EAL POUR REPLACE THE CHAMPLAIN BRIDGE AND THE NUNS' REMPLACER LE PONT CHAMPLAIN ET LE PONT DE L'!LE ISLAND BRIDGE DES SOEURS SHORT TI1LE TITRE ABREGE 1. New Bridge for the St. Lawrence Act 1. Loi visant le nouveau pont pour le Saint-Laurent

INTERPRETATION DEFINITIONS 2. Defmitions 2. Definitions

DESIGNATION DESIGNATION 3. Power to designate Minister 3. Designation du ministre

APPLICATION APPLICATION 4. Role of Minister 4. Role du ministre 5. Declaration 5. Declaration 6. Exemption-Bridges Act 6. Exemption-Loi sur les pants

AGREEMENTS ENTENTES 7. Minister of Public Works and Government Services 7. Ministre des Travaux publics et des Services gouvernernen taux 8. Implementation 8. Ministre

TOLLS, FEES OR OTHER CHARGES DROITS 9. Payment 9. Paiement 10. Charges recoverable 10. Droits recouvrables

ORDER IN COUNCIL DECRET 11. Other exemptions 11. Autres exemptions

REGULATIONS REGLEMENTS 12. Ministerial regulations 12. Reglements ministeriels

DMSION 29 SECTION 29 ADMINISTRATIVE TRffiUNALS SUPPORT SERVICE OF CANADA LOI SUR LE SERVICE CANADIEN D'APPUI AUX TRIBUNAUX ACT ADMINISTRATIFS 376. Enactment of Act 376. Ediction de Ia loi vi

AN ACT TO ESTABLISH THE ADMINISTRATNE TRIBUNALS LOI PORTANT CREATION DU SERVICE CANADIEN D'APPUI SUPPORT SERVICE OF CANADA AUX TRIBUNAUX ADMINISTRATIFS SHORT TilLE TITRE ABREGE 1. Administrative Tribunals Support Service of Canada Act 1. Loi sur le Service canadien d'appui aux tribunaux adminis tratift

INTERPRETATION DEFINITIONS 2. Definitions 2. Definitions

ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS SUPPORT SERVICE OF SERVICE CANADIEN D'APPUI AUX TRIBUNAUX CANADA ADMINISTRATJFS 3. Establishment of Service 3. Constitution 4. Principal office 4. Siege

CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR ADMINISTRATEUR EN CHEF 5. Appointment 5. Nomination 6. Status of Chief Administrator 6. Rang 7. Absence or incapacity 7. Absence ou empechement 8. Salary and expenses 8. Traitement et frais 9. Chief executive officer 9. Premier dirigeant 10. Responsibility 10. Fonctions 11. General powers 11. Pouvoirs generaux 12. Limitation 12. Restriction 13. Delegation 13. Delegation

ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CHAIRPERSONS PRESIDENTS DES TRIBUNAUX ADMINISTRATlFS 14. For greater certainty 14. Precision

EMPLOYEES OF THE SERVICE PERSONNEL 15. Appointment of employees 15. Nomination

GENERAL DISPOSITIONS GENERALES 16. Deeming-filing documents and giving notice 16. Presomption: depot de documents et fourniture d'avis 17. Deeming-amounts payable 17. Presomption : versement de sommes 18. Amounts for operation of administrative tribunal 18. Sommes versees pour le fonctionnement du tribunal admi nistratif 377-482. 377-482.

DMSION 30 SECTION 30 APPRENTICE LOANS ACT LOI SUR LES PlffiTS AUX APPRENTIS 483. Enactment ofAct 483. Ediction de Ia loi vii

AN ACT RESPECTING TilE MAKING OF LOANS TO LOI PORTANT OCTROI DE P~TS AUX APPRENTIS APPRENTICES SHORT TITLE TITRE ABREGE 1. Apprentice Loans Act 1. Loi sur /es prets aux apprentis

INTERPRETATION DEFINITIONS 2. Defmitions 2. Definitions

PURPOSE OBJET DE LA LOI 3. Purpose 3. Objet

APPRENTICE LOANS P~TS AUX APPRENTIS 4. Agreements with eligible apprentices 4. Accord avec un apprenti admissible 5. Agreements or arrangements with service providers 5. Accord ou arrangement avec un fournisseur de services 6. Suspension or denial of apprentice loans 6. Refus ou suspension de prets aux apprentis

SPECIAL PAYMENTS PAIEMENTS SPECIAUX 7. Special payments 7. Paiements speciaux

INTEREST-FREE AND DEFERRAL PERIODS PERI ODES SANS INTERET NI REMBOURSEMENT 8. Interest-free period 8. Exemption de paiement

DEATH OR DISABILITY OF BORROWER DECES OU INVALIDITE DE L'EMPRUNTEUR 9. Death of borrower 9. Cas de deces 10. Severe permanent disability 10. Invalidite grave et permanente

MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF OUTSTANDING APPRENTICE MAXIMUM ADMISSIBLE DES PRETS AUX APPRENTIS LOANS IMPAYES 11. Maximum amount 11. Maximum admissible

REGULATIONS REGLEMENTS 12. Regulations 12. Reglements

GENERAL DISPOSITIONS GENERALES 13. Forms and documents 13. Formulaires et autres documents 14. Right of recovery by Minister 14. Droit de recouvrement par le ministre 15. Waiver 15. Renonciation 16. Apprentice Joan denied due to error 16. Refus d'un pret aux apprentis en raison d'une erreur 17. Limitation or prescription period 17. Prescription 18. Requirement to provide information or documents 18. Fourniture de renseignements ou production de documents 19. False statement or information 19. Fausses declarations 20. Administrative measures 20. Mesures administratives viii

21. Authority to enter into agreements and arrangements 21. Pouvoir de conclure des arrangements ou accords 22. Payment out of C.R.F. 22. Paiements sur le Tresor 484-486. 484-486.

SCHEDULE 1 ANNEXE 1

SCHEDULE2 ANNEXE2

SCHEDULE 3 ANNEXE3

SCHEDULE 4 ANNEXE 4

SCHEDULE 5 ANNEXE 5

SCHEDULE 6 ANNEXE 6 192 Economic Action Plan 2014, No. 1 62-63 ELIZ. IT remittance information as defined by the beneficiaire, au sens donne a ce terme par la Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication. Telecommunication. 285. Subsection 58{2) of the Act is re- 285. Le paragraphe 58(2) de Ia meme loi placed by the following: 5 est rem place par ce qui suit : 5

Limitation (2) The Centre shall not disclose under (2) Toutefois, le Centre ne peut divulguer Restrictions subsection (1) any information that would aucun renseignement vise au paragraphe (1) qui directly or indirectly identify an individual permettrait d'identifier, meme indirectement, who provided a report or information to the l'individu qui a presente une declaration ou Centre, or a person or an entity about whom a 10 communique des renseignements au Centre ou 10 report or information was provided. une personne ou entite a 1' egard de qui une declaration a ete faite ou des renseignements ont ete communiques.

2010, c.12, 286. Section 58.1 of the Act is replaced by 286. L'article 58.1 de Ia meme loi est 2010, ch. 12, 18 s.1876 the following: remplace par ce qui suit: 15 art. 76

Centre may 58.1 (1) The Centre may, at the request of 58.1 (1) Afin d'aider le ministre a exercer Divulgation de disclose certains infonnation to the Minister, disclose information received or 15 les attributions que lui conH)re la partie 1.1, le renseignements Minister collected by the Centre under paragraph Centre peut, sur demande du rninistre, commu- 54.Ql(a) or (b), or any analysis conducted by niquer les renseignements qu'il a recueillis en the Centre under paragraph 54.Ql(c), to autho- application des alineas 54.Qla) ou b)-ou les 20 rities specified by the Minister for the purpose analyses qu'il a effectuees en application de of assisting the Minister in carrying out the 20 l'alinea 54.Qlc)-aux autorites designees par le Minister's powers and duties under Part 1.1. ministre.

Limitation (2) The Centre shall not disclose under (2) Toutefois, le Centre ne peut divulguer Exception subsection (1) any information that would aucun renseignement vise au paragraphe (1) qui 25 directly or indirectly identify any person or permettrait d'identifier, meme indirectement, entity other than a foreign entity as defined in 25 une personne ou une entite, a !'exception d'une section l1.41. entite etrangere, au sens de !'article 11.41.

2010, c. 12, 287. (1) Subsection 65(1) of the Act is 287. (1) Le paragraphe 65(1) de Ia meme 2010, ch.l2, par. 1882(d) replaced by the following: loi est remplace par ce qui suit: 30 al.ISSZdJ

Disclosure to 65. (1) The Centre may disclose to the 65. (1) Le Centre peut communiquer aux Orgaoismes law enforcement charges de agencies appropriate law enforcement agencies any 30 organismes competents charges de !'application I' application de information of which it becomes aware under de Ia loi tout renseignement dont il prend Ia loi subsection (4) or section 62, 63 or 63.1 and that connaissance au titre du paragraphe (4) ou des it suspects on reasonable grounds would be articles 62, 63 ou 63.1 et gu'il soupc,:onne, pour 35 relevant to investigating or prosecuting an des motifs raisonnables, seraient utiles aux fms offence under this Act arising out of a contra- 35 d'enguete ou de poursuite relativement a une vention of Part 1 or 1.1. infraction prevue par Ia presente loi qui est liee a une contravention aux parties 1 ou 1.1. (2) Section 65 of the Act is amended by (2) L'article 65 de Ia meme loi est modifie 40 adding the following after subsection (3): par adjonction, apres le paragraphe (3), de ·ce qui suit:

Compliaoce of (4) For the purpose of ensuring compliance (4) Afin d'assurer !'observation des parties Observation par persons or 1.1, et entities with Parts 1 and the Centre shall receive 40 1 et 1.1, le Centre rec,:oit tout renseignement ~tif~rsonnes information voluntarily provided to it by a qui lui est communique volontairement par 45 person or entity-other than an agency or body une personne ou entite-a I' exception des 2013-2014 Plan d'action economique no I (2014) 193 referred to in subsection (2)-relating to the organismes vises au paragraphe (2)-et qui se compliance with Part 1 or 1.1 of persons or rapporte a !'observation de l'une ou l'autre de entities referred to in section 5. ces parties par les personnes et entites visees a l'article 5. 288. The Act is amended by adding the 288. La meme loi est modifiee par adjonc- 5 following after section 65: 5 tion, apres I'article 65, de ce qui suit:

Disclosure to 65.01 (1) The Centre may disclose to the 65.01 (1) S'il a des motifs raisonnables de Communication Canada Revenue a l'Agence du Agency Canada Revenue Agency information relating to soup9onner que des renseignements se rappor- revenu du the compliance with Part 1 of persons or entities tant a !'observation de la partie 1 par des Canada referred to in section 5 if the Centre has personnes ou des entites visees a !'article 5 10 reasonable grounds to suspect that the informa- 10 seraient utiles en vue de la mise en oeuvre de tion would be relevant to the initial implementa- politiques concernant la declaration des tetevi tion of policies respecting the reporting of rements internationaux a l'Agence du revenu du international electronic funds transfers to the Canada, le Centre peut les communiquer a Canada Revenue Agency. l'Agence du revenu du Canada. 15

Limitation (2) Any information disclosed by the Centre 15 (2) Les renseignements communiques par le Limite under subsection (1) may be used by the Canada Centre au titre du paragraphe (1) ne peuvent etre Revenue Agency only for purposes relating to utilises par 1' Agence du revenu du Canada the initial implementation of the policies qu'aux fins de la mise en oeuvre des politiques referred to in that subsection or to ensuring visees a ce paragraphe ou du controle d'ap- 20 compliance with any provision of the Income 20 plication de toute disposition de la Loi de Tax Act that requires the reporting of interna- l'imp6t sur le revenu exigeant la declaration des tional electronic funds transfers to the Canada televirements internationaux a 1'Agence du Revenue Agency. revenu du Canada.

Limitation (3) The Centre shall not disclose any in- (3) Le Centre ne peut divulguer aucun 25 Limite formation under subsection (1) that would 25 renseignement vise au paragraphe (1) qui directly or indirectly identify a client of a permettrait d'identifier, meme indirectement, person or entity referred to in section 5. un client d'une personne ou entite visee a l'article 5. 289. The Act is amended by adding the 289. La meme loi est modifiee par adjonc- 30 following after section 65.01: tion, apres I'article 65.01, de ce qui suit:

Disclosure to 65.02 (1) The Centre may disclose to the 30 65.02 (1) S 'il a des motifs raisonnables de Communication ~::Revenue Canada Revenue Agency information relating to soup9onner que des renseignements se rappor- ~~!~e~~ du the compliance with Part 1 of persons or entities tant a !'observation de la partie 1 par des Canada referred to in section 5 if the Centre has personnes ou des entites visees a !'article 5 35 reasonable grounds to suspect that the informa- seraient utiles pour assurer I' observation de la tion would be relevant to ensuring compliance 35 partie XV.l de la Loi de I 'impot sur le revenu, le with Part XV.l of the Income Tax Act. Centre peut les communiquer a l'Agence du revenu du Canada.

Limitation (2) Any information disclosed by the Centre (2) Les renseignements communiques par le 40 Limite under subsection (1) may be used by the Canada Centre au titre du paragraphe (1) ne peuvent etre Revenue Agency only for purposes relating to utilises par l'Agence du revenu du Canada qu'a ensuring compliance with Part XV.1 of the 40 des fins relatives au controle d' application de la Income Tax Act. partie XV.l de la Loi de l'impot sur le revenu. 194 Economic Action Plan 2014, No. 1 62-63 ELIZ. IT

Limitation (3) The Centre shall not disclose any in (3) Le Centre ne peut divulguer aucun Limite formation under subsection (1) that would renseignement vise au paragraphe (1) qui directly or indirectly identify a client of a permettrait d'identifier, meme indirectement, person or entity referred to in section 5. un client d'une personne ou entite visee a !'article 5. 5 290. Subsections 66(1) and (2) of the Act 5 290. Les paragraphes 66(1) et (2) de Ia are replaced by the following: meme loi sont remplaces par ce qui suit:

Power to enter 66. (1) The Centre may, for the purpose of 66. (1) En vue de l'exercice des attributions Conclusion d'accords into exercising its powers or performing its duties qui lui sont conferees ~ la presente partie, le and functions under this Part, enter into Centre peut conclure avec tout ministere ou tout 10 contracts, memoranda of understanding and 10 organisme du gouvemement federal ou avec un other agreements with a department or an gouvemement provincial, le gouvemement d'un agency of the Government of Canada, with the Etat etranger ou toute autre personne ou government of a province, with the government organisation, au Canada ou a l'etranger, des Qf_!!_[oreign state and with any other person or accords sous le nom de Sa Majeste du chef du 15 organization, whether inside or outside Canada, 15 Canada ou le sien. in its own name or in the name of Her Majesty in right of Canada.

Agreements re (2) Agreements relating to the Centre's (2) Tout accord relatif a la collecte, pai: le Bases de dntnbnses collection of infom1ation from databases re- Centre, de renseignements conlenus dans des donn~es ferred to in paragraph 54ffi(b) must specify the 20 bases de donnees visees a l'alinea 54ffib) nature of and limits with respect to the precise la nature des renseignements qui 20 information that the Centre may collect from peuvent etre recueillis et les limites qui those databases. s'imposent a leur egard. 291. The Act is amended by adding the 291. La meme loi est modifiee par adjonc- following after section 68: 25 tion, a pres I'article 68, de ce qui suit:

Filing of 68.1 The Centre may, for the purpose of any 68.1 Dans toute procedure judiciaire engagee 25 Depot de documents action, suit or other legal proceedings brought sous le regime de la presente loi, le Centre peut documents or taken under this Act, file with the court any deposer aupres du tribunal des documents documents containing information referred to in contenant des renseignements vises au para- subsection 55(1). 30 graphe 55(1). 292. Subsection 71(2) of the Act is re 292. Le paragraphe 71(2) de Ia meme loi 30 placed by the following: est remplace par ce qui suit :

Contents (2) The report referred to in subsection (1) (2) Le rapport comprend notamment: Contenu shall include ~ une description des lignes directrices et .{Q2 a description of the management guide- 35 politiques de gestion du Centre portant sur la lines and policies of the Centre for the protection des droits et libertes de la 35 protection ofhun1an rights and freedoms; and personne; (b) information on the performance by the b) des renseignements sur le rendement du Centre of its duties and functions, including Centre dans l'exercice de ses fonctions, any statistics by which that performance is 40 notamment des donnees statistiques qui measured. permettent de mesurer ce rendement. 40 293. The Act is amended by adding the 293. La meme loi est modifiee par adjonc following after section 72: tion, apres I'article 72, de ce qui suit: 2013-2014 Plan d'action economique n° 1 (2014) 195

SERVICE OF NOTICES SIGNIFICATION

Authorized 72.1 The service of a notice by or on behalf 72.1 S'agissant d'une personne ou entite Personae person of the Centre on a person or entity referred to in visee al'alinea 5h.l), il suffit, pour que les avis autorisee paragraph 5(h.l) is sufficient if it is served on soient consideres comme signifies par le Centre the person who is indicated in the application ou a sa demande, qu'ils soient signifies a la for registration, or in accordance with subsec 5 personne dont le nom est indique dans la 5 tion 11.13(1), as being authorized to accept, on demande d'inscription- ou qui est foumi behalf of the person or entity referred to in that conformement au paragraphe 11.13(1)-qui paragraph, notices that are served or caused to est autorisee a accepter, au nom de la personne be served by the Centre under this Act. ou entite visee acet alinea, des avis signifies par le Centre en vertu de la presente loi ou que 10 celui-ci fait signifier en vertu de celle-ci. 294. (1) Paragraph 73(1)(a) of the Act is 10 294. (1) L'alinea 73(1)a) de Ia meme loi est replaced by the following: remplace par ce qui suit: (a) describing services for the purpose of a) determiner les services vises aux sous subparagraph 5(h)(v) or (h.l)(v) and activities alineas 5h)(v) et h.l)(v) et les entreprises, les 15 for the purpose of businesses, professions and professions et les activites visees a l' alinea activities for the purpose of paragraph 5(i); 15 5i);

2001, c.41, (2) Paragraph 73{1)(g) of the Act is (2) L'alinea 73(1)g) de Ia meme loi est 2001, ch. 41, s. 73(1) replaced by the following: remplace par ce qui suit: par. 73(1) (g) defining "courier" and "monetary instru g) definir les termes « effets » et « messa- 20 ments"; ger»; (3) Subsection 73(1) of the Act is amended 20 (3) La meme loi est modifiee par adjonc- by adding the following after paragraph (g): tion, apres l'alinea 73(1)g), de ce qui suit: (g.l) for the purposes of subparagraphs g.l) definir, pour !'application des sous 5(h)(iv) and (h.J)(iv), defining "deal in", in alineas 5h )(iv) et h.J)(iv) les termes «com- 25 relation to virtual currencies, and "virtual merce », relativement a la monnaie virtuelle, currencies"; 25 et « monnaie virtuelle »;

2006, c.12, (4) Paragraphs 73(1){!) to (l) of the Act are (4) Les alineas 73(1}1) a l) de Ia meme Ioi 2006, ch. 12, s.39(2) replaced by the following: sont remplaces par ce qui suit: par.39(2) (j) prescribing, for the purposes of subsection j) prevoir, pour I'application du paragraphe 30 9.3(1), the manner for determining whether a 9.3(1), la fac;:on d'etablir si une personne est person is a person described in any of30 visee aux alineas 9.3(1)a) a c) et les paragraphs 9.3(1)(a) to (c) and the circum circonstances dans lesquelles il est necessaire stances in which it is necessary to make that de l' etablir; determination; k) prevoir, pour I' application des paragraphes 35 (k) prescribing, for the purposes of subsec 9.3(2) ~. les cas ou !'agrement de la tions 9.3(2) and .GJ}, the circumstances in 35 haute direction est necessaire et les mesures a which it is necessary to obtain the approval of prendre; senior management and the measures to be l) prevoir les postes ou charges pour !'ap taken; plication de l'alinea f) de Ia definition de 40 (l) prescribing offices and positions for the « etranger politiquement vulnerable)) au pa purposes of paragraph (]) of the definition 40 ragraphe 9.3(3) ou de l'alinea j) de la "politically exposed domestic person" in definition de «national politiquement vulne rable)) a ce paragraphe; Page 1

Current to January 25, 2011

S.B.C. 1998, c. 9, s. 3

[effsince December 31, 1998](Current Version)

LEGAL PROFESSION ACT

SBC 1998, CHAPTER 9

Division 1 -- Law Society

Part 1 -- Organization

SECTION3

Public interest paramount

3 It is the object and duty of the society

(a) to uphold and protect the public interest in the administration of justice by

(i) preserving and protecting the rights and freedoms of all persons,

(ii) ensuring the independence, integrity and honour of its members, and

(iii) establishing standards for the education, professional responsibility and competence of its members and applicants for membership, and

(b) subject to paragraph (a),

(i) to regulate the practice oflaw, and

(ii) to uphold and protect the interests of its members.

SEC 1998-9-3, effective December 31, 1998 (B.C. Reg. 473/98).

CANADA

CONSOLIDATION CODIFICATION

Proceeds of Crime Reglement sur la (Money Laundering) and declaration des operations Terrorist Financing douteuses - recyclage Suspicious Transaction des produits de la Reporting Regulations criminalite et financement des activites terroristes

SOR/2001-317 DORS/200 1-317

Current to April2, 2014 Ajour au 2 avril2014

Last amended on July 31, 2010 Demiere modification le 31 juillet 2010

Published by the Minister of Justice at the following address: Publie par le ministre de la Justice al'adresse suivante : http://Jaws-lois.justice.gc.ca http://lois-laws.justice.gc.ca OFFICIAL STATUS CARACTERE OFFICIEL OF CONSOLIDATIONS DES CODIFICATIONS

Subsections 31(1) and (3) of the Legislation Les paragraphes 31 (1) et (3) de Ia Loi sur !a Revision and Consolidation Act, in force on revision et Ia codification des textes !egislatifs, June 1, 2009, provide as follows: en vigueur le 1er juin 2009, prevoient ce qui suit:

Published 31. (1) Every copy of a consolidated statute or 31. (1) Tout exemplaire d'une loi codifiee ou d'un Codifications consolidation is consolidated regulation published by the Minister reglement codifie, publie par le ministre en vertu de comme e!ement evidence under this Act in either print or electronic fonn is ev- !a presente loi sur support papier ou sur support elec de preuve idence of that statute or regulation and of its contents tronique, fait foi de cette loi ou de ce reglement et de and every copy purporting to be published by the son contenu. Tout exemplaire donne comme publie Minister is deemed to be so published, unless the par le ministre est repute avoir ete ainsi public, sauf contrary is shown. preuve contraire. [ ... ]

Inconsistencies (3) In the event of an inconsistency between a (3) Les dispositions du reglement d'origine avec !ncompatibilite inregulations consolidated regulation published by the Minister ses modifications subsequentes emegistrees par le - reglements under this Act and the original regulation or a subse greffier du Conseil prive en vertu de Ia Loi sur /es quent amendment as registered by the Clerk of the textes reglementaires l'emportent sur les dispositions Privy Council under the Statutory Instruments Act, incompatibles du reglement codifie publie par le mi the original regulation or amendment prevails to the nistre en vertu de la presente loi. extent of the inconsistency.

NOTE NOTE

This consolidation is current to April 2, 2014. The Cette codification est a jour au 2 avril 2014. Les last amendments came into force on July 31, 2010. demieres modifications sont entrees en vigueur Any amendments that were not in force as le 31 juillet 2010. Toutes modifications qui n'etaient of April 2, 2014 are set out at the end of this docu pas en vigueur au 2 avri12014 sont enoncees aIa fm ment under the heading "Amendments Not in de ce document sous le titre « Modifications non en Force". vigueur». TABLE OF PROVISIONS TABLE ANAL YTIQUE

Section Page Article Page Proceeds of Crime (Money Reglement sur la declaration des Laundering) and Terrorist Financing operations douteuses - recyclage des Suspicious Transaction Reporting produits de la criminalite et Regulations financement des activites terroristes 1 INTERPRETATION 1 1 DEFINITIONS ET INTERPRETATION 1 2.1 APPLICATION OF PART 1 OF 2.1 APPLICATION DE LA PARTIE 1 THE ACT 5 DELALOI 5 10 REPORT MADE UNDER SECTION 10 COMMUNICATION PREVUE A 83.1 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE L'ARTICLE 83.1 DU CODE OR UNDER SECTION 8 OF THE CRIMINEL OU AL' ARTICLE 8 REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTING DU REGLEMENT THE UNITED NATIONS D' APPLICATION DES RESOLUTIONS ON THE RESOLUTIONS DES NATIONS SUPPRESSION OF TERRORISM 8 UNIES SUR LA LUTTE CONTRE LE TERRORISME 8 11 EXEMPTION 8 11 DISPENSE 8 12 SENDING 8 12 TRANSMISSION 8 i2.1 SUSPICIOUS TRANSACTION OR 12.1 DECLARATION DES ATTEMPTED TRANSACTION OPERATIONS OU TENTATIVES REPORT 9 D'OPERATION DOUTEUSES 9 13 PRESCRIBED INFORMATION 9 13 RENSEIGNEMENTS DESIGNES 9 SCHEDULE 1 ANNEXE 1 SUSPICIOUS TRANSACTION OR DECLARATION DES ATTEMPTED TRANSACTION OPERATIONS OU TENTATIVES REPORT 12 D'OPERATION DOUTEUSES 12 SCHEDULE2 ANNEXE2 TERRORIST GROUP OR LISTED DECLARATION DE BIENS PERSON PROPERTY REPORT 15 APPARTENANT AUN GROUPE TERRORISTE OU AUNE PERSONNE INSCRITE 15

3 Registration Enregistrement SOR/200 1-317 August 28, 2001 DORS/200 1-317 Le 28 aout 2001

PROCEEDS OF CRIME (MONEY LAUNDERING) AND LOI SUR LE RECYCLAGE DES PRODUITS DE LA TERRORIST FINANCING ACT CRIMINALITE ET LE FINANCEMENT DES ACTIVITES TERRORISTES

Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Reglement sur Ia declaration des operations Terrorist Financing Suspicious Transaction douteuses - recyclage des produits de Ia criminalite Reporting Regulations et financement des activites terroristes

P.C. 2001-1500 August 28, 2001 C.P. 2001-1500 Le 28 aout 2001

Whereas, pursuant to subsection 73(2) of the Proceeds Attendu que, conformement au paragraphe 73(2) de la of Crime (Money Laundering) Acr, a copy of the pro Loi sur le recyclage des produits de la criminalite', le posed Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) Suspi projet de reglement intitule Reglement sur la declaration cious Transaction Reporting Regulations was published, des operations douteuses, conforme en substance au substantially in the form set out in the annexed Regula texte ci-apres, a ,ete publie dans la Gazette du Canada tions, as part of the Proceeds of Crime (Money Launder Partie I le 17 fevrier 2001 comme partie du Reglement ing) Regulations, 2000 in the Canada Gazette, Part I, on de 2000 sur le recyclage des produits de Ia criminalite et February 17, 2001 and a reasonable opportunity wao;; que Jes interesses ont ainsi eu la possibilite de presenter thereby given to interested persons to make representa leurs observations a cet egard au ministre des Finances, tions to the Minister of Finance with respect to the pro posed Regulations; Therefore, Her Excellency the Governor General in A ces causes, sur recommandation du ministre des Fi Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Fi nances et en vertu de l' article 73 de la Loi sur le recy nance, pursuant to section 73 of the Proceeds of Crime clage des produits de la criminalite•, Son Excellence la (Money Laundering) Acr, hereby makes the annexed Gouvemeure generale en conseil prend le Reglement sur Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) Suspicious la declaration des operations douteuses, ci-apres. Transaction Reporting Regulations.

' S.C. 2000, c. 17 'L.C. 2000, ch. 17 DORS/2001-317-2 avri/2014

does not have the technical capabilities to send the report etablies par celui-ci, si le declarant n'a pas les moyens electronically. techniques de le faire par voie electronique. (3) The report referred to in section 10 shall be sent in (3) La declaration visee a l'article 10 doit etre trans paper format in accordance with guidelines for report mise au Centre sur support papier selon les directives submissions that are prepared by the Centre. etablies par celui-ci. SOR/2002-185, s. 4. DORS/2002-185, art. 4.

SUSPICIOUS TRANSACTION OR ATTEMPTED DECLARATION DES OPERATIONS OU TRANSACTION REPORT TENTATIVES D'OPERATION DOUTEUSES 12.1 Every person or entity who submits to the Cen 12.1 Toute personne · ou entite tenue de faire au tre a Suspicious Transaction or Attempted Transaction Centre la declaration des operations ou tentatives d'ope Report set out in Schedule 1 shall keep a copy of the re ration douteuses visee a l'annexe 1 doit conserver une port. copie de la declaration. SOR/2007-122, s. 9. DORS/2007-122, art. 9. 12.2 The copy referred to in section 12.1 may be kept 12.2 La copie visee a !'article 12.1 peut etre conser in a machine-readable form or in an electronic form, if a vee sous forme lisible par machine ou sous forme elec paper copy can be readily produced from it. tronique, pourvu qu'un imprime puisse facilement etre SOR/2007-293, s. 4. produit. DORS/2007-293, art. 4. 12.3 (1) Subject to subsection (2), every person or 12.3 (1) Sous reserve du paragraphe (2), la copie vi entity that is required by section 12.1 to keep a copy of see a l'article 12.1 est conservee pendant au mains cinq the report referred to in that section shall retain that copy ans apres la date a laquelle la declaration a ete faite. for a period of at least five years following the day on which the report was made. (2) Where the copy that is required by section 12.1 to (2) Si la copie qu'une personne est tenue de conserver be kept by a person is the property of their employer or a appartient a son employeur ou ala personne ou l'entite person or entity with which they are in a contractual re avec laquelle elle est liee par contrat, elle n'est pas tenue lationship, they are not required to retain the copy after de la conserver une fois que le lien d'emploi ou le lien their employment or that contractual relationship ends. contractuel est rompu. SOR/2007-293, s. 4. DORS/2007-293, art. 4.

PRESCRIBED INFORMATION RENSEIGNEMENTS DESIGNES 13. The prescribed information for the purposes of 13. Pour !'application des alineas 55(7)/), 55.1(3)/) et paragraphs 55(7)(/), 55.1(3)(/) and 56.1(5)(/) of the Act 56.1(5)/) de la Loi, les renseignements ci-apres sont des is renseignements designes : (a) the following information concerning the client, a) relativement au client, a l'irnportateur, a l'exporta importer or exporter, or any person acting on their be teur ou a toute personne agissant pour leur compte : half, namely, (i) leur nom d'emprunt, le cas ech6ant, (i) their alias, if any, (ii) leur date de naissance, (ii) their date of birth, (iii) leurs adresse et adresse electronique,

9 SOR/2001-317 -Apri/2, 2014

(iii) their address and electronic mail address, (iii.l) leur numero de telephone, (iii.l) their telephone number, (iv) leur citoyennete, (iv) their citizenship, (v) le numero de leur fiche d'etablissement, de leur (v) their Record of Landing number, passport num passeport ou de leur carte de resident permanent ou, le cas echeant, le numero de ces trois documents ber or permanent resident card number, or all three ' numbers if applicable, (vi) si le client, l'importateur ou l'exportateur est une personne morale, son numero de constitution (vi) if the client, importer or exporter is a corpora ' tion, the date and jurisdiction of its incorporation la date de celle-ci et l'autorite legislative compe- and its incorporation number, tente, (vii) the name and address of any person or enti1y (vii) les nom et adresse de toute personne ou entite on whose behalf the financial transaction or at pour le compte de laquelle I' operation ou la tenta tempted financial transaction is conducted or on tive d'operation financiere, !'importation ou !'ex whose behalf the importation or exportation is car portation est effectuee, ried out, (viii) le numero de telephone de l'etablissement ou (viii) the telephone number of the place of business !'operation ou Ia tentative d'operation financiere a where the financial transaction or attempted finan ete effectuee, cial transaction occurred; and (ix) si le client, 1' importateur ou 1' exportateur est (ix) if the client, importer or exporter is an entity, une entite, son type d'entreprise; the entity's type of business; b) relativement a !'operation ou ala tentative d'opera (b) in the case of a financial transaction or an attempt tion financiere : ed financial transaction, the following information, (i) les numeros de transit et de compte, namely, (ii) le nom au complet de chaque titulaire du (i) the transit and account numbers, compte, (ii) the full name of every account holder, (iii) le numero de I' operation ou de Ia tentative d' o (iii) the transaction number, if any, peration, le cas echeant, (iv) the time of the transaction, (iv) l'heure de !'operation ou de Ia tentative d'ope ration, (v) the type of transaction, (v) le type d'operation ou de tentative d'operation, (vi) the names of the parties to the transaction, (vi) les noms des parties a !'operation ou ala tenta (vii) the type of account, tive d'operation, (viii) the name and address of all persons autho (vii) le type de compte, rized to act in respect ofthe account, if any, and (viii) les nom et adresse des personnes habilitees a (ix) the type of report, as listed in paragraph 54( a) agir a I' egard du compte, le cas echeant, of the Act, from which the information disclosed is compiled; and (ix) le type de declaration, selon l'alinea 54a) de la Loi, d'ou proviennent les renseignements commu (c) in the case of an importation or exportation of cur niques; rency or monetary instruments, the country from

10 DORS/2001-317- 2 avri/2014

which they are being imported or the country to which c) relativement a !'importation ou a !'exportation de they are being exported. monnaie ou d'instruments monetaires, le pays a partir SOR/2002-185, s. 4; SOR/2003-358, s. 3; SOR/2007-122, s. 10; SOR/ duquel ils sont im,p,ortes ou vers lequel ils sont expor 2008-195, s. I. tes. DORS/2002-185, art. 4; DORS/2003-358, art. 3; DORS/2007-122, art. 10; DORS/2008-195, art. I.