Law Business Essentials

Rules 4.1 and 4.2 of the Code of Conduct requires that your marketing must:

• be demonstrably true, accurate and verifiable; 
• be in the best interests of the public and consistent with a high standard of professionalism; 
• not be false, misleading, confusing or deceptive, or likely to mislead, confuse or deceive; 
• not take advantage of a vulnerable person or someone who has suffered a traumatic experience;
• not amount to coercion, duress, or harassment; and
• not bring the profession or the administration of justice into disrepute. 

Commentary to Rules 4.1 and 4.2 provide further guidance for appropriate marketing practices, including that you must refrain from:

• raising expectations unjustifiably; 
• suggesting qualitative superiority to other lawyers; 
• suggesting or implying you are aggressive; 
• disparaging or demeaning other persons, groups, organizations or institutions; 
• using testimonials or endorsements that contain emotional appeals; and 
• referring to your degree of success in past cases, unless such statements are accompanied by the qualification that past results are not necessarily indicative of future results and outcomes will vary according to the facts in individual cases. 

The following are examples of marketing practices that are in breach of the Code. 

• Statements that a firm has obtained the largest settlements in the history of the province or country are impossible to verify, as settlements are not reported. Promises of large settlements raise expectations of clients and must be qualified to ensure clients understand their cases must be decided or resolved on their own merits.
• Statements that the lawyer or firm is the “leading” or “top” lawyer or firm, or that the lawyer is “the best” or the most experienced in the city or in a certain practice area, suggest qualitative superiority. The use of third-party ratings may, in some circumstances, be misleading and is addressed later in this article.
• Using “& Company” or “and Associates” in the firm name of a sole practitioner implies that a firm has a greater number of lawyers or resources than it does. Firm size is often relevant to a client’s choice of counsel.
• Derogatory references to the billing practices, ethics or skills of other lawyers and law firms are clearly offside.
• References to numbers or types of past successes can be misleading. Is the success due to the lawyer’s skill or the strength of the case, the fact pattern, etc.? And what does it mean to have been “successful”?
• Suggestions that a lawyer or firm is aggressive, through use of imagery of aggression, like dogs or dragons, or references to being “tough” contravenes the Code. 
• Manipulating online ratings or creating false online reviews or testimonials is unethical. 
• Unauthorized use of another organization’s logo, including use of the Law Society logo, incorrectly implies that you are associated with or endorsed by that organization. Logos are often legally protected intellectual property, and unauthorized use can result in penalties and legal action.