Going Solo During Investigative Interviews

Can a person who is under investigation insist upon having someone with them during an interview? That was the issue raised in British Columbia (Securities Commission) v. Clozza, 2017 BCSC 419. Mr. Clozza wanted a director from his company present with him during his investigative interview. It just so happened that the director was a former employee of the regulator. The regulator declined to proceed with the colleague present and insisted that Mr. Clozza answer the questions on his own. Mr. Clozza refused, arguing that his colleague would act as his “counsel”.

The Court held that Mr. Clozza could not insist on having his colleague present. His colleague was not a lawyer and thus did not fit within the exception for having “counsel” present. Having the colleague present could compromise the confidentiality of the investigation. In addition, in the circumstances of this case, the colleague might be a potential witness or perhaps even a party in any subsequent proceedings. The Court ordered Mr. Clozza to attend the interview and answer questions without his colleague present.

This case does not address the issue of whether the regulator could permit a witness or subject of the investigation to have a “support person” present in the interview in appropriate circumstances.

More Posts

Controlled Acts and Criminal Offences

A senior osteopathic practitioner and instructor knew that performing an internal vaginal procedure was a “controlled act” that was not permitted to him under the

Standoff

In registration matters, regulators often ask for additional information to support the application. Often the application is considered incomplete until all of the requested information

Applicants with a Criminal History

There has been increasing scrutiny of the fairness of registration requirements based on the criminal record of applicants. To address that concern, many regulators conduct

Getting Technical

In 1979, Ontario’s Divisional Court said that an allegation of professional misconduct “is not in the form of [a criminal] indictment and it should not