The following excerpt is from A.S. v British Columbia (Director Of Child, Family and Community Services), 2017 BCSC 1175 (CanLII):
The application to admit the Factum related to Petition #4 only. Its purpose, as I understood it, was to provide evidence of post-trial conduct of counsel that may reveal matters such as whether the lawyers were on a frolic of their own. While I accept that in some cases, post-trial conduct can be considered if it informs an assessment of a lawyer’s conduct in the litigation (see Walker v. John Doe, 2014 BCSC 294 at paras. 41-44 and Jodoin at paras. 33-34), I concluded that nothing in the Factum would be probative to the issues that are relevant here.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.