NDAS-a-toxic-bargain

The National Self Represented web site contains many useful articles and discussions about UN-represented individuals and the court system.

Our Adversarial Justice System clearly favors the insiders. It may be near impossible to demonstrate a single case of lawyer v self represented where the lawyer did not take advantage.

Non Disclosure Agreements, for example, rarely serve or benefit Un-represented parties. https://representingyourselfcanada.com/ndas-a-toxic-bargain/ “… victims are sometimes pressured to sign an NDA as a ‘gag’ ”

In reality, who and what does NON disclosure protect?

The NSRLP website is great with loads of information by great people.

However hard truths take time to see daylight. Another example. “Consent Orders” are the same form of toxic bargain. Please remember – usually the lawyer writes and the unrepresented(victim usually) signs or is pressured.

A consent order is simply a court order of something agreed to by the parties, purportedly to “help” them – or “in their best interest”. The problem is that unrepresented persons with no legal training are simply NOT mindful of the STRICT interpretation of exact words, which easily leads to Contempt of Court motions from the lawyer.

Unrepresented’s pleadings of e.g. the Supreme Court of Canada’s clear statement in Pintea v John, at such a motion or any complaints elsewhere, will lead to unjustified “vexatious litigant” suits or labels https://representingyourselfcanada.com/wrong-diagnosis-wrong-strategy-why-more-restrictions-on-self-represented-litigants-wont-work-and-arent-justified/

EXAMPLE QUESTION

Lawyer’s letter to Unrepresented.

The court has dismissed our Application. We have a binding settlement, with NDA, on the other actions. While we await a written decision, I would be happy to help you, obtain a written decision, based on the exact terms of the new agreement, which I have enclosed.

FACTS: The court has dismissed the lawyer’s Application. The court has been notified of the settlement of all other actions. The new exact terms of the Lawyer’s letter, if used by the court, will change the court dismissal to dismissal on consent – a “consent order”.

IS THIS EXAMPLE CONDUCT ETHICAL? The new consent order will be public. The exact terms of the Settlement Agreement will be public. The NDA will be nullified. Is the lawyer seeking to exploit the unrepresented?

Your thoughts are welcome.