The Conduct Review summary referenced as 2011-09 published in the most recent Benchers’ Bulletin (2011: No.3) contained the following sentence:
"Further, he was advised that he could not lawfully affix his electronic signature to an electronic version of a document that is different from the original, regardless of whether the amendments to the original were authorized by opposing counsel."
The words "regardless of whether the amendments to the original were authorized by opposing counsel" should not have been included in the summary as the statement does not reflect current practice among solicitors. In most circumstances, where an amendment to an existing document is required to reflect the intention of the parties, the amendment may be made with the consent of counsel to the other parties to the agreement.
The reaction of the membership to the publication has indicated that there are variations in practice on this issue and the Law Society has appointed a task force to review the matter. A report on recommended practices will be developed and released shortly to the membership for guidance on this issue.
In the meantime, members should continue to practise, as before, in compliance with the requirements of section 168.3(3) of the Land Title Act.