You are here

Rationale for termination of the undertaking upon disclosure in court

This book was written by Michael Dew, a Vancouver lawyer who practices civil litigation, including assisting persons who have been denied insurance coverage by insurance companies, and persons dealing with builders lien issues.
Since the purpose of the implied undertaking is to protect the confidentiality of information, it is arguable that once the documents and information have been made public in court proceedings the undertaking should end because there is no confidentiality left to protect.
That principle has been codified in some provinces. For example, Rule 30.1.01(5) of the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194 provides as follows:
(5)  Subrule (3) does not prohibit the use, for any purpose, of,
(a) evidence that is filed with the court;
(b) evidence that is given or referred to during a hearing;
(c) information obtained from evidence referred to in clause (a) or (b).
In provinces without codification the implied undertaking rule expiration of the undertaking is governed by the common law.