Sharp practiceorsharp dealing is a pejorative phrase to describe sneaky or cunning behavior that is technically within the rules of the law but borders on being unethical.[1][2]
The term has been used by judgesinCanada; in one case, a Canadian Construction Board gave an example of "sharp practice" for one party to "take advantage of a clear oversight by the opposite party in a proceeding."[3] According to another source, a Canadian court of appeal judgement, judges should not accuse counsel of sharp practice lightly and should generally not make such an accusation based solely on written submissions.[4] Likewise in R v Badger the Supreme Court of Canada forbade the government from engaging in "sharp dealing" with First Nations in implementing treaties.
A lawyer should avoid all sharp practice and should take no paltry advantage when an opponent has made a slip or overlooked some technical matter. A lawyer should accede to reasonable requests which do not prejudice the rights of the client or the interest of justice.
Sharp Practice Definition: Prohibited conduct by a licensed lawyer in taking, or attempting to take advantage of a slip or overlooked technical matter by the other side to litigation, and to agree to reasonable requests which either prejudice his client or the interests of justice.
|
| |
|---|---|
| Types of misconduct |
|
| False evidence |
|
| Wrongful convictions |
|
| Advocacy |
|
| Contributing factors |
|
| Norms and remedies |
|
| Related concepts |
|
  | This article about Canadian law is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
